There are alternatives. The one that was pounded into me, and which I still use every time I am approaching a vast parking garage, heading toward a car-filled parking lot, walking alone as dark descends, or sometimes just in a large crowd, is awareness...We were trained in physical maneuvers, some of the less-refined martial arts moves that could help us fight if necessary before we could flee. Quick kicks or punches to the throat, groin and eyes are what most attackers wouldn't expect. [More]
Yes, awareness/preparedness are all part of Col. Cooper's basics. But that's not enough.I'm sure all those Ted Bundy victims you mentioned were quite aware of what was happening to them.
You stupid little girl: I know someone very well who is 6'3" and weighs 230 lbs. He has years of martial arts experience as a young man, starting with Korean Tae Kwan Do, heavy involvement with Okinawan Ishin Ryu, including tournament competition, judo, and even a college course in hand-to-hand combat taught by the late Joe Begala, the man who wrote the Navy/Marine aviator training manual used in WWII and who was "the winningest wrestling coach" in the nation. Plus he's been in a few real fights and knows what it's like to be struck, kicked, kneed and grappled full force, and to bleed.
He's even the subject of some Herman Munster ribbing from his family, like over the time he yanked up too hard on the parking brake and ripped it out of the car floor, or lifted the end of the van enough so it could be freed from a snow-filled pothole.
He would never call any of this to anyone's attention to make them think how "bad" he was: quite the contrary. Since you brought up the Clint Eastwood quote, let me offer another: "A man's gotta know his limitations."
Not being aware of that is the same as being oblivious.
There are plenty of guys he knows who could mop the floor with him--and many of them little guys, like any of his teachers, or men who have never taken a day of martial arts training in their lives and are simply tougher, faster, stronger... The only chance he'd stand, and he freely admits this, is if he had a weapon to overcome their physical advantage.
So you take a basic intro class, and that's all your 10-week session really was, and think you're now qualified to instruct? You fool. I'm sure you'd like to give everyone your expertise on what you'd do when an enraged animal with twice your upper body strength has you on the ground, which is where most fights end up--it's not like in the movies, where everything is choreographed with perfect form, you know.
This is journalistic malpractice, and proves that a little bit of knowledge truly is a dangerous thing. Anyone who listens to an incompetent such as yourself is liable to get themselves killed.
3 comments:
Also:
* Males tend to be taller and have greater natural upper-body strength. In a face-to-face confrontation, the man has a longer reach, and could land a strike faster, or with a hook. Good luck landing a kick in the same amount of time, or reaching the throat/eyes without first being struck.
* Your 6'3" friend has a longer stride. Imagine if he was the attacker. Fleeing may not be an option, either.
* Chances are the attacker will choose the most advantageous time to strike. It's unwise to assume that there will be the opportunity to have good balance and an open path for a strike. This also assumes the defender is not dazed after having already been struck, or in an awkward position.
* Unless you possess experience, strength and speed, it's pretty stupid to move closer to an attacker and present your arms in such a manner where they can be grabbed, twisted and broken, or presenting the stomach, neck or head for an undefended strike. Much more efficient to draw a compact firearm at waist height and retreat while firing, for example.
* All bets are off if the defender is set upon by multiple attackers; awareness starts with realizing that it's not safe to visit a parking garage in the crime-ridden part of a city... alone.
* Ten weeks isn't enough time to become proficient with a firearm, either.
I agree with the malpractice claim, David, but it's not limited to journalists. We've had a number of fads, including the "defecation and urination" defense, "krotty" by unqualified instructors, vegetable spray paint, and the point-blank radio shack capacitor defense. I guess the new fad is "reality-based" defense... but, uh, without effective weapons. What is with the aversion to effective weapons? It's like "hoplophobia" or something.
And of course, if the attacker has any kind of weapon at all, there's a whole new dynamic.
Professional law-enforcement officers who are trained to shoot to kill are often traumatized by the experience.
Is that what the "Only Ones" are trained to do? That's now what they tell us.
Post a Comment