Not all fights are gunfights

[FireForged]

sure.. a person has to be able to perform certain maneuvers and tasks in order to bring "effective" physical force to bear. It goes without saying that a certain level of stamina is also required. However, there is an entire universe between being physically incapable of putting up a fight and being Mr. Elite fitness guru. Generally speaking, a person with a barely average level of fitness can certainly be formidable if they actually know how to fight, have been trained or have experience.

The biggest person does not always win, the smartest does not always win, the strongest does not always win, the fittest does not always win and the best equipped does not always win. Many many many issues all come into play in regards to who is a formidable fighter and who is not. Being the most fit is probably not going to be what decides the winner. I do not say any of that to suggest that fitness is not important, surely it is. I say that to suggest that all bias aside, it may not be the pinnacle of importance. Sometimes training, knowledge and experience can easily trump "fitness". Certainly it is better to be more fit than less fit but I like to keep these sort of things in perspective.

As far as cops go:

lets not pretend that several cops are struggling with a resisting offender because they cannot manage to subdue him/her. They are likely struggling because their physical efforts are not intended to seriously damage the person who is resisting. They are struggling because they are burdened by many rules and policies which substantially limit what they can and cannot do. I am not saying that I disagree with those restrictions, I am merely highlighting the fact that they exist. The badguy is often fighting for all they are worth and several officers are trying to effect an arrest without harming them. In my opinion, that is not a circumstance where you can fairly judge whether or not a particular police officer is a formidable fighter/defender or not.

On being an enthusiast:

You do not have to be a self defense enthusiast to be a formidable fighter. You do not have to be an enthusiast to seek or receive effective self defense training. You do not have to be an enthusiast to be a proficient, effective or formidable person in regards to firearms related combat. Being an enthusiast or having an enthusiast mindset is simply not very important in my opinion.

I do not think it matters one way or the other if any police officer is ever an enthusiast in regards to life safety or combative training. I simply think it is important that he/she take the training seriously and that they put forth a professional effort toward being proficient. Ultimately, the goal is often to develop as well as maintain an acceptable level of knowledge, capability and skill.

 

[hammer_jockey_91]

this brings up a good point.
side bar, i carry pepper spray. in my state, legally it is equivalent to using hands on hands. no i dont fight fair, but no this isnt my good point its bringing to mind.

i have to wonder how many instructors have actually been in fights before.
i used to box, i also grew up in a bad neighborhood so a fist fight was pretty common. once my family moved us out to AZ from chicago i was truly shocked at how big a deal it was to punch someone in the face. i see alot of internet tough guys boasting about all their gear but i have to wonder how much real life true experience do they have?
just a thing i ponder at times.

 

[HiBC]

It may vary ,state to state... In my state, the way I understand it (No,I'm not quoting law. No,I'm not going to prove it) there is something about "Mutual unarmed combat"

If you refuse to fight ,try to leave,and are attacked, That is one self defense circumstance.

Its not quite the same if you engage in unarmed combat (What might be considered mutual consent) and then,when you are getting your butt kicked,
you pull a gun and shoot the guy.

It does not necessarily work out to be armed and decide"I'll teach this guy manners with my fists"
I,personally,would hope any witnesses would testify I did everything possible to avoid violence from the start.

Of course,there are other sudden attacks. We may need some skills to buy time/space.

 

[Skans]

A defensive situation always depends on the circumstances. A person who can't think himself out of a paper bag probably aught not be carrying a gun.

If a stupid gun owner wrongly deploying his gun in a given situation just affected him, then I'd keep my nose out of it. Unfortunately, when stupid gun owners do stupid things with their gun, it affects all of us. It shouldn't.....but it does.

 

[JustJake]

i have to wonder how many instructors have actually been in fights before.

Good point.

Given most instructors who “preach the teach” at you also display a noticeably bad case of “belt bulge,” you have to wonder just how poor their level of basic physical fitness and agility is.

Gunfight, fist fight?

Some of these alleged been-there/done-that guys are fighting just to pull their pants on in the mornings.

I used to box, i also grew up in a bad neighborhood so a fist fight was pretty common. once my family moved us out to AZ from chicago i was truly shocked at how big a deal it was to punch someone in the face. i see alot of internet tough guys boasting about all their gear but i have to wonder how much real life true experience do they have?

Some may well have a similar background, but it might as well have been 100-years ago because they let their fitness level slide.

It’s one thing to attain a high level skill-set in the marital arts or in gunfighting that’s equivalent to, say, a “black belt” level, but it’s another thing to retain that skill-level over time. So what Eviltravis said in the first part of his post above about fitness is correct.

That requires maintaining basic physical conditioning (fitness) and, separately, a regimen of regular training in executing the core skills - whether it’s in the dojo or on the range - and especially with a defensive firearm such training has to involve a lot of non-static/non-stationary drills that reasonable mimic what a gunfight might look like on the street or inside a structure.

 

[reynolds357]

I've wondered about the legal side of shooting someone quite a bit. Shoot someone and you spend at least one night in jail. Then they family sues you and maybe the state wants to put you away. If I had to shoot someone I'd leave post haste! they find the MTY case good for them, next they need to find the gun. The problem's you can have for doing nothing other than defending yourself and trying to be right about it are far to great. Fight back? Ya, maybe 30 yrs ago! I'm 74 and don't deceive myself that I can handle one or several young guy's, probably several. Seem's they seldom if ever attack one on one! And they don't attack to teach you a lesson about anything, like getting old is bad for you, they beat the person half to death and then throw in a few extra kicks and slams just for the hell of it on a person that can't even crawl anymore!

I do not care if the bad guy or guy's are not armed. You come to beat me up and your coming to a gun fight! Just think about how fast thing's would change if the bad guy's all started getting shot and the shooter walked away.

No, the more I think about it the more I think for me it's shoot and walk away. Years ago I drove over the road in 48 states and Canada. In New York City one time I was talking to a cop and he mention that they know most us driver's are armed in the city. He told me if I ever have to shoot someone just leave them lay and walk away, don't call the cops. He said, "we'll find them and if we don't know who did it there's less paper work". I think that was good advice!

Sounds like a recipe to get life in prison to me; especially when DA finds a social media post saying what you said in this one.

 

[101combatvet]

The article is somewhat silly. I agree that you need to know the laws, most people carrying don't, and most instructors for CCW avoid the questions because they don't know a good solution to a given situation. Given that most people don't know how to fight, taking martial arts classes isn't a bad idea, but that should have been accomplished before reaching the age of handgun ownership. The process of being a proficient fighter usually takes years of training. When carrying, one should avoid physical contact with others, even if you are a blackbelt; maintain a safe distance and be aware of their surroundings. Most situations can be de-escalated by maintaining a level of maturity. Refrain from exchanging words; it's usually a waste of time. If you can leave, leave; if the aggressor pursues you, that alone should work in your defense.

 

[TunnelRat]

Given that most people don't know how to fight, taking martial arts classes isn't a bad idea, but that should have been accomplished before reaching the age of handgun ownership. The process of being a proficient fighter usually takes years of training.

Depending on how you define “proficient” it can take years to be a proficient shooter as well. I agree that ideally all of this training would start sooner, but that doesn’t help those that find themselves as older without any martial arts training and have to start somewhere. There’s a point that you have to be realistic about your capabilities as a martial artist and that some knowledge (and overconfidence) can be more dangerous than none in certain cases, but I think the same logic applies to shooting, too.

I think your later points about deescalation are important and go to the point of having more tools in a toolbox.

 

[101combatvet]

Depending on how you define “proficient” it can take years to be a proficient shooter as well. I agree that ideally all of this training would start sooner, but that doesn’t help those that find themselves as older without any martial arts training and have to start somewhere. There’s a point that you have to be realistic about your capabilities as a martial artist and that some knowledge (and overconfidence) can be more dangerous than none in certain cases, but I think the same logic applies to shooting, too.

I think your later points about deescalation are important and go to the point of having more tools in a toolbox.

It would be best for the individual to define their proficiency in fighting. However, I would only recommend it to some. I've seen grown men the size of soda machines go down crying for their mommy at the hands of a guy that looked like a runt of the litter. On the other hand, a firearm is a real equalizer, and most people can become reliably proficient in a short period.

 

[davidsog]

I'm not sure about this. I'm not interested in wrestling with someone. If I'm defending myself from an attack, I've already done everything I can to get away and avoid the situation.

You would be stupid to try and wrestle with an attacker. Luck and chance can effect even the highest of skillsets. This is more if you are out of options with nothing left to defend yourself. I would not use it as an escalating force continuum but my state has stand your ground and castle doctrine. In my experience you are just increasing the chances you will end up in a body bag.

In a typical year, More people are murdered by unarmed attackers than rifles and shotguns combined. Sounds like you are making a good decision in not being interested in wrestling with someone who means to do you harm.

You can check Table 8 of the FBI crime statistics:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

 

[shafter]

I think most men would be shocked to find out just how helpless they are at the hands of someone who has been training BJJ or MMA for even a short time. Size, strength, or fitness won't matter much. Once they are within arms reach of you you won't ever have the chance to draw your gun.

I can't emphasize enough how important it is to have a game plan for when you are attacked but aren't legally justified in using deadly force. If you are physically capable, or capable of becoming physically capable, then do so and learn some striking and grappling. The chances of getting into a violent encounter with someone who is truly proficient is pretty small but many more people start to train and stick with it for a few months or so and then quit. Those people are dangerous to someone who has never trained.

If your body simply isn't capable of fighting physically then have some good pepper spray and learn how to use it properly.

A firearm is a tool for a specific level of violence. Not all violence rises to that level. Running away is a good idea but that may not always be an option if you are with your significant other or your child. A person who is serious about self defense will have a plan for all levels of violent encounters from avoidance, deescalation and running away, to strikes, grappling, pepper spray, to ultimately lethal force if necessary.

You would be stupid to try and wrestle with an attacker. Luck and chance can effect even the highest of skillsets. This is more if you are out of options with nothing left to defend yourself. I would not use it as an escalating force continuum but my state has stand your ground and castle doctrine. In my experience you are just increasing the chances you will end up in a body bag. /QUOTE]

There is no such thing as luck in grappling. If you've trained wrestling or BJJ and your attacker hasn't, you will drag them down to the depths of the deep ocean. The reverse is also true if they've trained and you haven't and it doesn't take a black belt to do this.

As a final note, training will allow you to identify those who are dangerous to you vs an untrained attacker. That could be crucial in being able to justify why you ended up using deadly force.

 

[davidsog]

I firmly believe laws are made to protect criminals!

They have become that in many states due to the diluted thinking prevalent in today's society and hubris of many "intellectual students of law". We are living the consequences of "If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything".

In my state we have stand your ground and castle doctrine. Engaging in a fist fight, losing, and then shooting your antagonist would be a great way to spend a lot of money on attorney's with an even greater chance of ending up in prison as some have pointed out already.

I would say your verbal judo is more important than your physical judo.

Verbalizing loudly, "Stop, Do Not Attack Me", once that line has been crossed and you are in fear for your life would be much more beneficial than trying to engage in a fist fight. The majority of Police Officers who are killed in the line of duty are killed with their own weapon after losing the fist fight.

 

[labnoti]

I didn't read the link. I will only add what a veteran cop said: "When you're a cop, every fight is a gunfight." He understood that the result of wrestling could be getting shot with his own gun.

Now I would caution any application of this to a concealed carrying person who is not law enforcement. There is a difference.

I would caution against wrestling when you're carrying, but that doesn't mean going to guns sooner. Be determined to avoid a fight. Have a less lethal option like OC spray.

 

[davidsog]

He understood that the result of wrestling could be getting shot with his own gun.

He is right. As someone with training that was in theory the best the DoD could provide.....
Hands are lethal and IMHO you are surrendering your safety to hope that you will prevail and hope they will not take your life. Hope is not a good plan.

That is not even getting such things as knives or other weapons. A trained knife fighter will deliver a lethal wound before an opponent is even aware of the knife. Only Hollywood and idiots show the knife before the fight.

A person who communicates the intent to do you harm is a reasonable threat to your life. It is that intent to harm not the weapon be it fist, knife, or gun that constitutes the threat your life.

 

[davidsog]

One-punch deaths: How lives are devastated by a single blow

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38992393

One-punch deaths not that unusual around the world

https://www.ktnv.com/news/one-punch-deaths-not-that-unusual-around-the-world

‘One-punch killer’s’ charges upgraded from misdemeanor to felony

https://nypost.com/2020/01/04/one-punch-killers-charges-upgraded-from-misdemeanor-to-felony/

One-punch killings: They happen more often than you might think

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2015/07/one-punch_killings_they_happen.html

 

[NEPrepper]

in my state you have a duty to retreat

Eye Roll

 

[labnoti]

It happened to John Claggart. Don't be a John Claggart.

 

[davidsog]

in my state you have a duty to retreat

Then retreat. Don't get into a fist fight thinking that is the non-lethal way of not retreating.

Glad I live in a state that believes in the right to self defense and not one looking to subvert it for political safety.

 

[fastbolt]

Read the article. Didn't really have time to read all the personal opinions following in the thread.

Bottom line? I found myself nodding along in agreement by the time I'd finished the 3rd paragraph of the short article. The rest of the article read rather like something crafted for general Public dissemination in some meeting. Prudently cautionary and nothing to really offend.

Yep, if you're unfamiliar with how the laws are written and enforced in your state, (or state you're visiting), than it might be wise to find out.

There are otherwise good folks in jails and prisons who exercised bad judgment and made poor decisions in some spur-of-the-moment, and found they didn't actually understand either the laws involving self defense, or how courts (and juries) might later look at their actions with different eyes.

Cops typically not only get initial training in the laws they're expected to enforce, but they may get recurrent/updated changes each year, for not only new laws, but also any changes to existing laws resulting from court case law. Even so, they - as we can see in the news - may make mistakes of law, mistakes of judgment and poor decisions when it comes to the use of force. (And that doesn't include mistakes of policy, which can add problems for both individual cops and their agencies.)

Personally, I didn't see any issues with some of the broad strokes of cautionary thoughts offered by Jim Wilson. Better to think about such issues and problems before they happen, than look back in retrospect and regret for not having taken a little time to better prepare.

Granted, my thoughts and opinions have been formed by my own LE career and experiences, as well as having served for many years as a firearms instructor (and Taser instructor for a few years), and having helped teach classes for people interested in getting/renewing CCW licenses. Even so, things change, and once I no longer had to keep my training current for POST, I had to spend more of my own effort to try and stay current on some things that might affect me in my retirement CCW, and any situations requiring self defense of any nature (force used). That's also why I presently pay for a couple legal defense programs that provide 24/7 on-call attorney access.

Different strokes. Free country. The freedom to make choices does come with the potential for consequences, though.