Good talk on blocks

Sensei Canna offers insight into the real world of self defense!

Moderator: Van Canna

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:47 pm

Darren laur>>

The Tell:

A fellow police officer that I know in Ontario, was able to identify a subject who was carrying a concealed illegal firearm in a shoulder holster under his jacket, by the way he was periodically (and likely unconsciously) moving the arm in which the firearm was hanging under. My friend was able to notice this because he did the same thing when he carried. This in my opinion is a really good example of low emotional threat pattern recognition. Some other tells could include:

- How is the person carrying a visible weapon such as a knife. Is it a clip-it type knife that blends in color to the garment being worn by the potential threat? Is it a knife (such as a Buck knife) that is kept in a pouch, but the pouch is carried upside down to allow the force of gravity to deploy the knife into the hand quickly, once unsnapped, with very little arm movement; a favorite of some outlaw motor cycle gangs.

- Is the movement of a person’s body (especially hands and arms), consistent with the pre-deployment of a weapon, be it concealed or visible?


While working narcotics enforcement (especially form covert observation posts), I would often use pattern recognition “tells” that were consistent with those who were dealing at the street level; such as head and eye movement, positioning to sell their product, the short walk and talks, which would allow me to concentrate my observations on “primary” targets to watch more closely.

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:49 pm

Darren Laur »

The two goals of this article were:

1) To once again bring to light the high emotional patterns of ritualized combat that are often very visible overt precursors to a physical attack, and

2) To become more aware of the low emotional/behavioral patterns of the experienced attacker, who uses the element of the surprise ambush to their tactical advantage for a committed covert attack.


Threat pattern recognition, and early threat recognition skills, during the awareness phase, are the first steps in staying safe, and can play a very important role in reading behavioral intent.

This process can then allow one to utilize avoidance/escape/evasion strategies, or to engage a threat either non-verbally, verbally, and/or physically (including the pre-deployment of a weapon on your part) prior to an actual physical attack by the threat faced.

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:53 pm

2Green »

"Shows that even a BULLET isn't always reliable, thats what astounds me the most."
Aahmed
---------------------------------------------------
This doesn't surprise me at all. There are numerous accounts of people who are shot, or worse, continuing to fight.

Only structural bio-mechanical damage can ( in my opinion) actually prevent an attacker from continuing an assault.

Pain and other "compliance" techniques simply don't work reliably.

Just two weeks ago, I saw a drunken patron thrown out through a door by the bouncers so hard that his head bounced off the pavement. He got back up and tried to get back into the bar.

The bouncers then wrestled him to the ground while one of them applied a brutal armbar/wrist lock while the others pummeled him.
Then they let him go and backed off.

He literally sprang back to his feet laughing, and said "Ha! Who's next?!"

No structural damage, therefore he could continue to engage.
If his knee had been broken or other structural damage had been inflicted, he would simply have been bio-mechanically unable to stand and fight.

The bouncers were not entitled to go this far, so all the damage they were able to enforce had basically no effect, other than entertainment for the drunk. He was still structurally sound, so still in the game.

This is to me the BIG LESSON of Karate.

You have to be able to physically BREAK your attacker to stop him reliably, because the psychological "break" is a myth these days.

It's all about destroying structure, and hey, if the odd nerve-strike lands in the right place, well, bonus.

I'll put my money on the broken bones.

~N~
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:55 pm

Willy »

I was looking at these today. It sometimes doesn’t bother a drugged up dude or an extremely committed individual. Looks like in the majority of cases you can bank on two things:

1) The average person will have problems functioning.

2) Your so called friends will have lots of laughs at your expense. :cry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4U-6VF66NU&NR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr7pGlDD ... ed&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmENP-T1 ... ed&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udx3vVow ... ed&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OxnXVQJ ... ed&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVST1Ku_rzE&NR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBGxShRJ ... ted&search

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziRWjT8F ... ed&search=


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0Byua1 ... ed&search=


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWpBmHPd ... ed&search=

Re: The original clip of the police officer with the pea shooter….see Neil’s comments on biomechanical advantage. Hey if you have the best ninja sword in the world and just cut his toe off you will pay as well.

If your going to shot a monster make sure you choose a round to do the job. Most forces go with a 40 or 45 these days. A little 9mm should be for teaching the kids how to pop holes in paper. Hunt elephants with elephant guns. Larger rounds and higher velocities are required to stop the EBG. Rip a hole in the beast don’t poke a wee leak in him.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:00 pm

Street Medicine

By Gabe Suarez
1) MOVE TO COVER
- Actively seek cover or create distance in order to carry-out rule “3”
- Never take your eyes off the threat

2) REMAIN IN THE FIGHT
- Check Weapon / function / reload, confirm good solid grip
- STAY MOBILE

3) CONDUCT A QUICK SELF ASSESSMENT
- You’ve been shot / stabbed, you know your hit, a gun shot or stab wound is NOT going to disable you (mindset)

4) IMPLEMENT THE PROPER FIRST AID MEASURES
- Bleeding Control (TQ possibly)

5) REMEMBER TO SIMPLY CALL FOR HELP
- squad radio
- cell phone
- lung power

6) CONDUCT A QUICK ASSESSMENT OF YOUR WEAPON OR ANY AVAILABLE WEAPONS
- Access gear status more completely
- Rounds available, back-up weapons

7) BE AWARE OF POSSIBLE/IMPENDING LOSS OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND PLAN FOR SAME
- Do you have a Plan to break contact due to severity of injury?

8) MENTAL CONDITIONING IS PIVOTAL TO YOUR SURVIVAL
- Have a Plan and have rehearsed possible scenarios
- There is no reason to be down and out post-injury (mindset)

We all know that a large part of our survival during violent encounters depends on having a plan. A plan is just a general guideline that we use to maneuver ourselves during which may be times of stress or complexity.

A plan helps us keep things simple and helps us stay focused. Everyone is different, has different skill levels, different concerns, and different beliefs so each plan must be tweaked to fit our personal situation.

At times it’s even quite practical to have a plan “B” that can be put into effect should initial attempts fail.

McDevitt’s SIMPLE RULES OF SELF RESCUE are based on research into officer survival and input from law enforcement officers, military special operators, and the backbone of America, armed civilians. Use the rules as a basis for your own plan.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:05 pm

Darren laur>>

What was most interesting in this research study, was the fact that they found the use of feet resulted in the greatest injury severity, when compared to the use of other blunt objects, and that sharp object (edged weapons) was the next most likely to result in severe injury. To me this is another reason why one cannot stay on the ground given the probability of being kicked or stomped by your attacker or their friends.


Specific to knives, I attempted to locate research specific to:


1. At what point did the offender have their weapon deployed, and

2. What kind of occurrence rate is there for knife to knife encounters


Unfortunately I could not find any Peer reviewed research on these two topics, but I did just recently read a book by James Lafond called, “The Logic of Steel, a Fighters View of Blade and Shank Encounters 2001”. Based upon a large number of interviews (1000 separate acts of violence), the author created something that he called a “Violence Index”.

Although not a peer reviewed scientific study, Lafond does offer some retrospective empirical/anecdotal research that is of some interest and does correspond with some of the above noted research:

§ 59% of incidents occur outside
§ 59% of incident occurred after dark
§ 69% of incidents were described as an attack rather than a consensual fight
§ 53% involved alcohol or drugs
§ 25% of violence resulted in at least one party being knocked out
§ 63% of violent acts were resolved in less than 10 seconds
§ 25% of violent acts lasted from 10 seconds to 1 minute
§ 13% lasted more than a minute
§ 57% of aggressions were successful, 32% by knockout
§ 13% of defences were successful, 50% by knockout
§ 32% of aggressors were armed
§ 8% of defenders were armed
§ 7% of aggressors required medical attention
§ 28% of defenders required medical attention
§ 1% of aggressors died
§ 4% of aggressors died


Specific to incidents of weapon use per 1000 acts reviewed:

§ Edged weapons 11%
§ Firearms 10%
§ Clubs, rocks, sticks 8%


According to LaFond, in most edged weapon attacks, the attacker already had their weapon deployed, and the vast majority of attacks lasted less than 10 seconds. This supports the fact that unless the fighter (defender) already has their knife pre-deployed prior to engagement, the defender will have very little time to deploy their own weapon.

This fact is also compounded when you also factor in Survival Stress Reaction, retrieving a holstered or pocketed knife, combined with the attacker’s already violent engagement.


Specific to knife-to-knife encounters, LaFond reported that this type of occurrence in extremely rare.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:23 pm

Darren Laur »

I believe that most of those who will sexually assault women will use the fact that the woman either knows, loves, or trusts them to their advantage. If a woman has "feelings" about their attacker, then they will be less likely to be as ruthless as they will need to be when it comes to protecting themselves.

Teaching women, and men, to de-humanize or "ghost" their threat is an important self protection attribute than needs to be trained and harnessed by all.

I also see this here at the school when training students. When a student is working with a partner they know in Neural Based Training (ie put a known face to a known threat) combative intensity goes down. But once they are reminded to "ghost" the threat (de-humanize) then combative intensity goes way way up.

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:27 pm

Darren Laur>>

Profile of Violent Victimization Incidents:

· Victims are most often victimized in commercial establishments or public institutions

· Excluding spousal violence, violent crimes were most likely to occur in a commercial place or public institution (38%). In particular, 14% of all violent incidents took place in an office, factory, store, shopping mall, 12% in a bar or restaurant, 7% in schools, and 5% in hospitals.

· In addition to being the most common location for violent victimization, commercial establishments were often the victim’s place of work (43%)

· Public places such as sidewalks, street and highways accounted for 9%, parking garages or parking lots 3%, rural areas or parks 3%, public transportation 2%

· 19% of violent crimes took place either in or outside the victims home

· Robbery most often took place on the street, 43%

· Both physical (39%) and sexual assaults (49%) were most likely to occur in commercial establishments.

· The most common commercial establishment where sexual assault occurred was a bar or restaurant (20%) or an office building, factory, store or shopping mall (19%)

· Physical assault took place most often in commercial establishments such as office buildings, factory, store or shopping mall (14%) followed by a bar or restaurant (11%)

· One quarter of violent crimes involved the use of a weapon

· Robberies were most likely to involve a weapon (45%), physical assaults (29%) sexual assaults (9%)

· Overall, knives were twice as likely to be used in a violent crime, as were guns (6% versus 3%). Other weapons recorded included bottles, bats, sticks, and rocks (17%)

· In 52% of violent incidents either alcohol or drugs played a role

· Most violent crimes involved a male acting alone (76%), while in about one in five crime incidents more than one accused was involved (22%). Of the three types of violent crimes, robberies were most likely to involve more than one accused (39%)

· Among the 76% of violent incidents in which one accused was involved, the vast majority of accused were male (87%) and this remained true for the three types of violent crimes, ranging from 86% of physical assaults to 91% of sexual assaults

· The majority of accused acting alone tend to be young, with one-half between the ages of 18-34 years

· Half of violent crimes are committed some someone known to the victim (51%). Strangers accounted for 44%. A small proportion (5%) of incidents were committed by a family member, however, this analysis excludes spousal violence.

· 25% of violent incidents result in victim being injured

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:48 pm

As We Train
What do we need to know_



POSTURING (P)

Posturing is a system of body language designed to avoid physical conflict. It is made up of a mixture of facial expressions, body positioning/movement and verbal directions.

Some of these can be seen at a distance, but as the distance closes the posturing become more extreme. Just as animals strut and bellow, so do humans, all designed to intimidate an opponent in order to avoid a fight, to gain dominance over an opponent without coming to blows.

These can range from “hard” stares to body positioning to pushing and shoving. However, if these postures are ignored or not placated then the fight might begin in earnest. The ritual can be broken down into four stages:

Selection ~ an opponent is selected and visual and/or verbal challenges are issued.

Posturing 1 ~ intimidation by size and voice, strutting and bellowing.

Posturing 2 ~ not always seen, but intimidation by strength.

Action ~ this might be fight, flight or disengage, dependent on how the cues are received and what cues are given off by the opponent.

There is no guarantee of how long it will take for a person to move from posturing to action, but this ritual is always followed except in a few cases.

Narcotics, alcohol and mental health may well negate the use of posturing as the “higher” brain functions are affected.

If a person is well versed in conflict, they may avoid these rituals altogether, such as experienced fighters and criminals. In these cases we must look to the biological signs.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:23 pm

The aggressive (fight) cues can be identified as:

Squaring off, usually accompanied by wide arm gestures, this is to make the attacker look larger. (P)

Loud, verbal abuse and challenges used to directly intimidate. As aggressive tendencies increase, the level of language reduces to monosyllabic responses.

The questioning style is indicative to the issue of a challenge e.g. “Well?” “So?” “Eh?” “And?”*1 (P), then later (P)(B)

Pushing/shoving to intimidate as a display of strength as well as size*1(P)

Bared teeth, usually with the lips tight to the teeth and the corners of the mouth pushed forward. (P)

Furrowed eyebrows to protect the eyes. *4 (P)

Chin tucked towards chest to protect the throat. (P)

Staring intently at specific area of the body a result of tunnel vision but also an indication to where a person intends to attack. (B)

White face (as blood drains away towards muscles)*2(P)

Red face *2(P)

Clenching of fists.(P)(B)

Leaning in. A state of preparation to launch forwards. *1(P)(B)

Forward motion. A forward motion will precede just about every attack. Interestingly backward motion can also be seen, but it is usually another posturing movement, for intimidation. (P)(B)
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:24 pm

The Fear (flight) cues can be identified as:

Muscle twitching/shaking/tightening.(B)

Shaky voice.(B)

Flushed face*2 (B)

Furtive eye movements as if looking for an escape route.(P)

Distractive movements*3(B)

Staring intently,a result of tunnel vision, focusing on the perceived threat.(B)

Eye brows raised*4(P)(B)

Bared teeth, but with the corners of the mouth pulled back. (B)

Hands splayed in front of the body, as if to ward of a threat (P)

Freezing. This is known to occur in states of extreme fear. Animals use it as a defence mechanism against predators who hunt primarily by sight. (P)(B)

Retreat or body movements indicating a desire to disengage, such as turning the body away.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:27 pm


Other cues in both categories are:

Increase in breathing and heart rate.

Digestive system is affected. On the one hand the sympathetic response
causes a restriction, the parasympathetic release. This is why some feel the need to vomit, urinate or defecate when stress, a sign of the internal conflict between these two systems.


Impaired vision ~ the loss of peripheral vision (tunnel vision).

Impaired hearing ~ nothing but a high pitched ringing can be heard (auditory exclusion), this is due to the blood vessels in the ear dilating. May also be brought on be cognitive dissonance.

Dry mouth

Sweating

Cognitive dissonance ~ this is where small details are focused on and the “bigger picture” is forgotten.

In extreme states the “higher” functions of the brain appear to be restricted. Speaking becomes difficult either the voice is shaky or the words are monosyllabic.

Time slows ~ events seem to occur in slow motion (tachypsychia).
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:29 pm

CONTROL

It is possible to reduce the effects of the chemical imbalance on our bodies in a conflict, but we can never remove them.

Training or working in conditions that induce this chemical response will tend to desensitise us, we become less “bothered” about the threat, and thus we can maintain an element of control.

As has been stated, experienced fighters know a quieter individual can be a greater threat; positioning the body into a natural fighting stance can augment this.

From this position they know that you probably know how to fight, as it is the most stable to launch a strike from.

Another way to get some one to capitulate is to cause what is known as an “adrenal dump”.

By behaving in a manner that causes the onlooker’s brain to flush the body with adrenaline, you can create the feeling of fear, which in turn causes them to capitulate.

This can be done by sudden and extreme aggression. A way to enhance this is to push the opponent out of fighting range, it is thought that the creation of distance causes the body to go from “fight” to “flight” as they have suddenly been given a way out.

Certainly when trying to intervene in a fight a very loud and aggressive “OI!!” has been known to stop a fight, this is certainly the case for some prisoners who end up fighting in order to “keep face”, but desperately want someone else to end the fight for them.

It is important to remember, however, that this increase in aggression can refocus the opponent towards you and trigger an attack; after all they are already geared for action and just require the appropriate trigger.

Issuing calming or passive body language can placate an aggressive opponent.

Keeping a relaxed body with little movement, emphasised with a relaxed face and voice can help keep your attacker in the deciding phase as they still can’t decide if you’re a threat or not, but as with responding with aggression, this may also trigger an attack as the individual may decide you no longer pose a threat to themselves as you are passive.


It is my hope that, just as I did, by gaining an understanding of these mechanics of conflict will not only help you to recognise your own responses, thus gain an element of control over them, but you will recognise them and the pre-fight rituals that accompany them in others, thus (hopefully) negating physical conflict at an earlier opportunity.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:33 pm

Communication

Darren Laur »

Hard, Soft, Neutral, Covert
The 5 Golden Rules to Verbal Communication

Ahhhhh the gentle art of verbal communication/persuasion. When engaging a threat in Verbal persuasion, context and situation is going to dictate my verbal communication strategy be it:

Hard: (Back off !!!, don’t come any closer !!!, stop right there !!!) Verbal Demand

Soft: (I’m feeling a little uncomfortable with you being so close) Verbal feedback

Neutral: (Can you just step back a little bit? Why do you have to come so close?) Verbal Question

Covert: (see if you can’t just step back a little bit) Verbal question combined with a subconscious challenge


Whatever the communication strategy chosen, one MUST also be congruent with body language exhibited by you as the user. Remember if the voice and body don’t match, the threat will usually believe the body.


Hard communication can often evoke a negative challenge by one who is psychologically intent on causing you harm.

Often phrases such as back off, don’t come any closer, or stop right their, especially as a primary verbal response, can often “precipitate” a physical altercation to take place, an undesirable outcome in my opinion.

Having said this, as a police officer (an often situational and context specific job) I will use these phrases as a last chance, save face, opportunity that a subject can comply with before physical force is used to control resistant or assaultive behaviour.

For most (non-law enforcement, non-military, non-security) here at the school, I teach students to use neutral linguistics patterns that can synergize into soft linguistics patterns and when needed, interject a covert linguistic pattern with hard patterns often being a last resort.

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:36 pm

Darren Laur>>

Eg:

During a “street interview” when a subject is probing your proximal zones I might say (from a good passive stance)_ “ Wow, I don’t know about you, but I am feeling a little uncomfortable, can you just step back a little, or if you want I can just step back” (neutral combined with soft).

If I get non-compliance I may move to, “ Hey brother, see if you can’t just step back a little bit for me” (covert). If I still get non-compliance I may now move to. “ I need you to back off” (Hard).

It has been my experience that starting with a hard linguistic pattern only causes the person; especially if it is someone you do not know, to escalate his or her intentions.

This is especially true if the subject has friends, as they will want to save face. In other words these hard phrases, when used in street encounters, often don’t de-escalate a situation, BUT often escalate one to a physical encounter.


When verbally interacting with a threat, remember that your communication should not in most circumstances:

1. Challenge in a negative way

2. Command your threat to do something

3. Threaten

4. Insinuate that your threat is wrong

5. Prevent the threat from saving face

These are what I call the “5 Golden Rules of Verbal Communication” when attempting to de-escalate a potential aggressor.

As always, a physical interdiction can take place at any time no matter what communication strategy used, if you believe the threat is about to physically attack.

Often, these communication strategies can cognitively “pattern interrupt” the threat, when used appropriately, giving you a tactical advantage when initiating a physical first strike.

Darren
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57245
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Van Canna's Self Defense Realities

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests