Truly Realistic Training

[fastbolt]

Realistic training can mean different things, to different people and in different contexts.

At its basic level, good training helps students learn the required skills faster, as well as helps make them better able to retain the lessons and skills developed in their training.

Good training can involve finding ways to create the learning and retention of the desired skills. That doesn't mean having to break the bank, though, nor invent new and complex methods to perform effective tasks.

Gotta have a solid, practical and relevant foundation upon which to build, though.

Eager lower skilled martial art students always want to jump ahead to the difficult techniques, yet they often fail to recognize when they haven't sufficiently prepared their basic foundation skillset and knowledge to let them properly learn, let alone use, the lessons of the more advanced training.

It's never a waste of time to invest attention in the practice of essential basics. Solid basics are always going to remain at the very heart of the more complex, or advanced, skills.

[ShootistPRS]

Yep! just walk into the alleys in downtown Seattle and start skipping and humming to yourself.
When the guys step out of the shadows and ask, "your money or your life?" you can practice the real thing.

That is not really the best way to practice. You need to know that what you are training for CAN happen and you have to know that you are ready to kill another person to defend your life. While it's happening is not time to ask yourself questions. You have to program your brain with every possible series of events and be ready to improvise for the one you missed. You have to respond to aggression with more aggression and the same amount of fore.

For instance if a guy walks up to you and says he's going to kick your tail, you just swing! Hit him as many times as you can until he walks away or is on the ground. Then you disengage while being ready for any kind of escalation. If you wait to see if he is serious you will be the one on the ground and he might not walk away.

[OldMarksman]

For instance if a guy walks up to you and says he's going to kick your tail, you just swing!

Verbal threats alone do not justify the use of force in self defense. You would be the aggressor, and you would have lost any lawful basis for defending yourself with force.

[ShootistPRS]

There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight, You would have to disengage and let it be known that you were done before using more force would be excusable..

[johnwilliamson062]

I think YPG is still offering realistic training. I think they'll even provide arm and ammunition.

[OldMarksman]

There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight,

Yes, and it is unlawful for both parties.

Of course. using force against someone in response to a mere verbal threat is something else. It is battery.

[ShootistPRS]

OldMarksman,
In Washington state it is not illegal. Agreeing to a physical confrontation is not considered assault or battery. I don't pretend to know about other States but I try to stay up on the laws in Washington.

It is not wise because if the fight is escalated to knives or guns it gets very gray quickly.

[Brassguy]

I used to have a commander at Ft Drum in NY who would have us run two miles to the range and then we had to qualify with our weapons without taking a break to simulate combat stress. We would also do a two mile run and at the end they would randomly pick 5 or 6 guys to stick a IV into their buddy. That is stress, finding a vein to stick while trying not to dry heave

[John J. McCarthy, Jr]

I great way to learn to shoot under stress is to shoot competitively. The stress isn't identical to the stress of a gunfight but it's close enough to develop the skill.

When I participate in any professional training I go to find out what I need to practice on my own. I never expect to complete this or that training and be ready for the O.K. Corral.

Ultimately we are all self-trained.

http://http://www.anamericanwithagun.com/

[OldMarksman]

Agreeing to a physical confrontation is not considered assault or battery.

No, but striking someone solely in response to a verbal threat does not constitute agreed upon combat, and it is battery.

Do not enter into a fight in Seattle.

[Deaf Smith]

There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight

Here in Texas, as long as you join a dojo, boxing club, etc... and the 'fight' is there, it ain't mutually agreed combat. It's a 'class' and 'sparring'.

A few times when people wanted to fight me I invited them to a dojo to sign up and sign a release (it was my dojo!). Was amazing how that tended to cool the hot heads.

Deaf

[OldMarksman]

Here in Texas, as long as you join a dojo, boxing club, etc... and the 'fight' is there, it ain't mutually agreed combat. It's a 'class' and 'sparring'.

Are there jurisdictions in which that is not true?

[Deaf Smith]

Are there jurisdictions in which that is not true?

Jesus man... look up Texas law and, uh, the education code.

Deaf

[OldMarksman]

Jesus man... look up Texas law and, uh, the education code.

You have already told us about Texas. What I asked is whether Texas is unique in that respect.

[Deaf Smith]

You have already told us about Texas. What I asked is whether Texas is unique in that respect.

Feel free to look up the education codes in other states.

Deaf

[OldMarksman]

Feel free to look up the education codes in other states.

Not a simple task by any means. State law structures and groupings vary signifcantly.

Where I live, the laws governing the subject have nothing to do with "education codes" and are not grouped therewith.

I was hoping that there might people knowledgable of the situations in their jurisdictions who might want to enlighten us.

In any event, I would be surprised if there were many states that would not provide for some kind of completion and training, whaler it be covered under "education codes" or somewhere else.

[stephen426]

Originally Posted by John J. McCarthy, Jr

I great way to learn to shoot under stress is to shoot competitively. The stress isn't identical to the stress of a gunfight but it's close enough to develop the skill.

I totally agree with the above. If you want to be competitive, you've got to practice. If you practice a lot, you will most likely revert to what you practice if the poop hits the fan. The more you practice, the more muscle memory you build and the gun almost becomes a part of your hand.

Try to find IDPA clubs that focus on regular carry guns rather than IPSC which is too gear dependent. I'm sure a lot of the skills still translate from IPSC, but who carries a race gun on a daily basis?

I started participating in "practical shoots" with my sister's friend and that has really broadened my skills. The drills include drawing from holster, engaging multiple targets, shooting from retention, shooting on the move, shooting from cover, rapid fire, Bill Drills, weak hand drills, Tueller drills (using a dummy on a cart), and others I don't recall. Shooting nice pretty groups, slow fire, while stationary, at a stationary target only means so much in the real world. Still, some practice is better than no practice!

[Deaf Smith]

Not a simple task by any means. State law structures and groupings vary signifcantly.

Little logic here. Most states allow 'discipline' in the classroom to be enforced in several ways... that is where the education codes come in.

And virtually all states allow martial arts dojos to have full contact sparing. One becomes a member of such dojos for $1, and then the owner/teacher has them sign releases. As long as the 'demonstration of techniques' does not end up with death or very serious injury then it's all ok (broke nose, busted teeth, bruised ribs.. no biggie).

I once had a guy want to spar me after class. He paid one buck and signed the release. Funny thing was, one of my friends wanted to watch.. and he was bored once there was no blood and went home. The nut who challenging me was, well, pitiful, which is what my teacher told me about those do such, and I dunno where he got the idea to challenge me for you see to ask a teacher to a sparring match is to directly challenge the teacher's skill and expect to get the stuffings beat out of you.

And I've seen many a time where a bit of 'attitude adjustment' was given out in classes. Those with big heads (maybe a few times I got a serving to) have their heads deflated..

Deaf

[OldMarksman]

Little logic here. Most states allow 'discipline' in the classroom to be enforced in several ways... that is where the education codes come in.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand.

And virtually all states allow martial arts dojos to have full contact sparing.

Well, that more or less answers my custom, which was "Are there jurisdictions in which that is not true?".

One becomes a member of such dojos for $1, and then the owner/teacher has them sign releases.

Not all of the ones in our area work that way.

And I've seen many a time where a bit of 'attitude adjustment' was given out in classes.

You are way off topic now.

[Deaf Smith]

You asked...

State law structures and groupings vary signifcantly.

Where I live, the laws governing the subject have nothing to do with "education codes" and are not grouped therewith.

So that is where 'Most states allow 'discipline' in the classroom to be enforced in several ways... that is where the education codes come in.

Not all of the ones in our area work that way.

So what? I surely don't care.

You are way off topic now.

'attitude adjustment' is where one gets to full contact sparing. Full contact sparing is where you get to fights.. inside a dojo. So yes, it is 'on topic'. One is giving the new $1 student an education in 'attitude adjustment'.

Deaf

[OldMarksman]

'attitude adjustment' is where one gets to full contact sparing. Full contact sparing is where you get to fights.. inside a dojo. So yes, it is 'on topic'. One is giving the new $1 student an education in 'attitude adjustment'.

Just what do you mean by "attitude adjustment",and how does it relate to the subject of realistic training for lawful self defense?

[Deaf Smith]

Just what do you mean by "attitude adjustment",and how does it relate to the subject of realistic training for lawful self defense?

Scroll up to the 'mutually agreed fight ' thingie at post #36.as

As for 'attitude adjustment' scroll up to post #43.

Deaf

[Ghost1958]

Oldmarksman asked about various jurisdictions.
In KY, there is legal mutual combat

As far as SD goes you can even start a fight.
If you at some point try to disengage and communicate that to your opponent, but your opponent will not allow you too all of your SD options are available to you including lethal force if you reasonably believe danger of death or serious bodily harm. By KY statute.

As far as responding to a threat of physical violence if intent ability and opportunity exist you do not have to wait to be struck to react with physical or lethal defensive force, depending on which I'd warranted under the circumstances.

This in no way means one must respond.
But it is legal by statute to do so.

[OldMarksman]

Oldmarksman asked about various jurisdictions.
In KY, there is legal mutual combat

Thank you.

That seems to vary a great deal among states--and it is not always yes or no.

As far as SD goes you can even start a fight.
If you at some point try to disengage and communicate that to your opponent, but your opponent will not allow you too all of your SD options are available to you including lethal force if you reasonably believe danger of death or serious bodily harm. By KY statute.

That seems to be true everywhere.

You can mount a defense of justification for your use of deadly force under such circumstances.

That would mitigate against criminal liability for that aspect, but it would not necessarily constitute a defense against a charge of battery.

As far as responding to a threat of physical violence if intent ability and opportunity exist you do not have to wait to be struck to react with physical or lethal defensive force, depending on which I'd warranted under the circumstances.

No one anywhere is required to wait to be attacked before resorting to self defense.

The defender is not required to divine the intent of someone who appears to present a serious threat. Rather, he must have some basis for believing that, unless he acts immediately, he will almost certainly be attacked then and there with force--a judgment call that may be ruled upon by others after the fact.

Mere verbal threats will not suffice. What someone suggested in Post #27 does not constitute the justified use of force. In some states that's a matter of common law; in others it is spelled out in statutes. It has nothing to do with whether mutual combat happens to be lawful.

And, of course, he will be justified in the use of no more force than is necessary to defend himself.

Except for the mutual combat issue, and that's really a secondary one, I do not see anything in the KY self defense laws that is markedly different from the law anywhere else in this country. Of course, one cannot tall that just by looking at statutes--court rulings and jury instructions come into play.

On second thought, some states do vary in terms of when and under what circumstances the display of a weapon may be lawfully justified.

But that's another subject.

[Ghost1958]

I don't write very well ,my bad, so I'll try to be clearer.
As to physical force response in KY.
If a person 1. Gets in arms reach of me. Opportunity, 2. Appears capable of doing me serious harm. Ability. And 3. Verbally threatens to strike, beat up, etc ,,,intent that is all that is legally required here to use physical force. He doesnt nessacarily verbalize intent. Could just by posture or actions give reasonable belief he is a threat.

What level of threat would depend on his age physical condition vs my own at 59 yrs old etc.

One thing that we do have that many states don't is the statute that once a claim of self defense has been made police may not arrest, take into custody etc the defender.
They may use normal investigative technique but unless there is substantial evidence the self defense claim is a lie the defender will not spend one minute in police custody or be taken to the station etc.
As of I believe 2014 that statute was strengthened in language so In practical terms unless a SD claim is blatantly obviously and unquestionably false, arrests resulting from SD seldom occur.
The few that almost never occur on scene but later on after the case against the claimed defender is believed air tight.