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 04, 2020 3:37 pm

Rule number two is to protect yourself from the negative. Like most things worth learning, this is easier said than done. You can walk into the range and tell yourself, “I’m going to love shooting the shotgun today!” But if you don’t change your behavior, your technique, or your attitude, you’re probably still going to hate it.

Examine why you hate the shotgun. Is the recoil painful? Is the particular model too big for you? Have you been reluctant to ask for help from the range master? Have you gotten some bad training? Work on fixing what’s wrong on the outside, and then change that negative self talk into a positive.

“I’m going to do great with the shotgun today because I sought out some new training.” “I’m going to rock the shotgun today because this model fits me so much better!” Self talk isn’t just about words, it’s also about behavior, attitude and actions.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:38 pm

How do you talk to yourself when something goes right? When you pull over that carload of bad actors, conduct your investigation, and come up with two warrant arrests, a gun, and a trunk full of stolen property, do you tell yourself “Great job man!” Or do you just say “Wow that was lucky.”

When the sergeant compliments you on your great piece of police work do you say “Thanks Sarge!” or do you just say “It was no big deal, I just happened to stumble upon them.” This is called your “self speak.”
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:39 pm

Rule number three is to consciously improve your self-speak. When someone compliments you on something good, learn to follow it up with something positive; saying it out loud will help you believe it.

So when your firearms instructor says “You did really great with the shotgun today” reply with something like “Thanks! I’ve been working really hard to improve and I think its working” instead of “I think I was just lucky today.”

It’s no secret that old habits are hard to break, so if you’ve been full of negative programming for years and years, and most of us have, a few kind words to yourself aren’t going to fix the problem overnight.

What you have to learn is how to make a concentrated effort to have some daily “self-conversation” to start overriding the negative.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:40 pm

Rule number four is to use visualization to literally see yourself removing those bad programs from your brain just like you remove obsolete or damaged software from your PC, and then replace them with positive self talk.

Every day (or night) while you’re on your way to work, tell yourself: “I’m ready for anything. I’m confident in my ability to survive, to use the appropriate force, to make the right decisions, to win every encounter.”

Let’s face it, talking to yourself might seem a little bit crazy at first, but learning and understanding how your conscious and unconscious mind works is just one of the many ways you can gain that mental edge that all crime fighters need to perform at their peak. Stay safe!
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Fri Jun 05, 2020 3:34 pm

John Tosches/shins of steel

R.I.P.

My dear friend.


Image
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 7:19 am

http://www.cs.unm.edu/~sheppard/proxemics.htm

In a real fight the boundaries are set. This is known as territoriality-the need to demonstrate a possessive or ownership relationship to space.

This translates to Dads chair, your brothers room, your girlfriend, Things you know are going to be a problem if the ownership or space rules are broken. we learn this from birth. This is all under the study of proxemics.

Animals will mark off their territory with urine, and defend this space to the death.

When you back up in this encounter you are taking a submissive or passive role, your no longer the alpha male. We travel with this knowledge of space all day, for some reason it is thrown out the window in kumite, but not in kata.

Ever travel in an elevator? Those who are the alpha males stand in the middle or by the door, others go to their corners and stare at their feet or the buttons on the wall. You might take back a step, or an angular one, but there's no block only a strike.




Be aware of your personal bubble and ready for those who want to " pop it ."

_________________
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 7:22 am

f.Channell »

35% of communication is verbal.
65% is non verbal.

What does backing up mean to your opponent?
What does averting your eyes from someone mean?

I remember a Judo match I had once when my opponent was actually shaking when I grabbed him.
I knew I had already won the match.

The Airport security people now look for certain physical signals which alert them to a possible criminal or terrorist.

How would you be behaving if you were planning to take over a plane?
If you had some heroin in your suitcase?

How does this relate to self defense? Huge.

Imagine the opportunity to see and know what your opponent is about to do to you?

Lenny Testa I think it was, once told me a story of standing beside Art Rabesa at a tournament and Art told Lenny who was going to attack first and what they were going to do.
He was right every time.

That's the kind of stuff I want to learn. 8)

F.
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 7:23 am

f.Channell »

Of course, the illusion of space is shattered when I’m approached on the street, or when the passenger behind me starts kicking my chair.

At these moments I feel my blood pressure rise, my stomach clench, and my temper grow short. While this reaction might be appropriate in truly life-threatening situations, nothing is at stake most of the time.

Maybe knowing that I am responding only to a perceived threat to my safety will help me to remain calm the next time this happens. Then again, maybe not. —
Morgen Jahnke

Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:02 pm

In this social unrest times we are living right now, with the virus and the riots that seem to be increasing, and with convicts being released from prison and put to the streets...and with the rude mannerism we seem to encounter more of...[people are generally rude no matter where you find them] and people roaming around puffing their chest to look tough...your chances of getting involved in an ugly confrontation are greater than ever.

So with this in mind....Self Defense Law and the Martial Artist

gary6dan »

Self Defense Law and the Martial Artist
by Peter Hobart, Esq.


Introduction

Anthony Ervin was a career criminal. He was arrested eight times on assorted robbery, weapons, and assault charges between 1987 and 1996. On October 8, 1996, he acosted Courtney Beswick, a blind man who must have seemed like an easy target.
After Ervin’s demands for money were repeatedly refused, he attacked Beswick. Beswick, a long time practitioner of martial arts, threw his assailant over his shoulder, onto the pavement. The fall broke Ervin’s neck, and he subsequently died.

Having survived this terrifying ordeal, Beswick still faced the possibility of criminal and civil charges. In this case, however, the police and estate of the deceased decided not to file charges against Beswick, since he clearly acted in self-defense.

But this outcome is hardly the rule in the United States. In fact, a recent law review article indicates that a disturbing trend toward targeting martial arts practitioners is emerging in the field of tort law.

With this in mind, it seems that the modern martial artist must have at least a rudimentary understanding of the applicable law if he ever hopes, or fears, that his training may be called upon outside the dôjô.

In an effort to provide some practical answers, this article will address the national majority position, and any substantial minority positions regarding criminal and civil liability with respect to the use of force in defense of self, defense of others, and defense of property.

Pennsylvania law, where relevant, will also be examined. The majority position reflects the practice of most states, and is increasingly consistent with the Model Penal Code (MPC). Pennsylvania law regarding these issues is largely based on the MPC.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:03 pm

The author regrets the ubiquity of the terms "reasonable" and "generally" in this article — that these terms are essential merely reflects the complexity, and often the vagueness, of the law.

Case law varies widely among jurisdictions, and is constantly modifying and reinterpreting the rules of law. In an effort to provide some concrete conclusions, a lsit of relatively unqualified guidelines is provided at the end.

CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Self-defense, non-lethal force:

Criminal liability is distinguished from civil liability in that it is the state which brings charges against the defendant, as opposed to the victim or his estate. The general criminal law allows for the use of necessary and proportionate, non-deadly force in self-defense anytime the victim reasonably believes that unlawful force is about to be used on him. Pennsylvania law is generally consistent with this position. The critical language under this standard is ‘reasonable belief’, ‘unlawful’, ‘about to’ and ‘necessary and proportionate’.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:04 pm

In order to establish a reasonable belief, the court will use both a subjective and an objective standard. The subjective standard determines whether this defendant did in fact believe that an attack was imminent (whether reasonably or unreasonably). In arriving at this conclusion, the defendant’s state of mind is relevant. Thus, a paranoid defendant might introduce evidence of his condition to show that his belief, however unreasonable, was at least genuine.

The reasonableness of the defendant’s actions is judged by an objective rather than a subjective standard. The reasonable person standard is one of the most difficult aspects of the law to understand. In an effort to do justice to both sides, the law requires the trier-of-fact (usually the jury) to consider whether an ordinary person in the defendant’s position would believe that force was about to be used against him.

The defendant’s (and the assailant’s) physical characteristics and past history will be taken into account, but mental condition is of no concern. Thus, comparative size, weight, strength, handicap or pre-existing injury may support a reasonableness finding, but unusual sensitivity or fear will not.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:06 pm

There is no simple formula for the legal application of force in self-defense under American law. The confusion is due, in part, to the complexity of the issue itself, and in part to the variety of state laws within the American legal system. The requirement that the force defended against be unlawful simply excludes the right of self defense when an ‘assailant’, such as a police officer, is legally authorized to use force.

It must be noted however, that a majority of jurisdictions allow the use of force, including deadly force, in resisting an attack by a person not known to be a police officer, and the use of non-deadly force against a known police-officer attempting to make a wrongful arrest. Pennsylvania does not allow the use of force in resisting wrongful arrest, but it does allow the use of force if an arresting officer unlawfully threatens to use deadly force, or does not identify himself.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:08 pm

Self-defense, lethal force:

The standard for use of deadly force is, predictably, higher. The general criminal law allows for the use of deadly force anytime a faultless victim reasonably believes that unlawful force which will cause death or grievous bodily harm is about to be used on him. Again, Pennsylvania law is generally consistent with this standard.

The faultlessness requirement does not mean that the victim must be pure of heart and without sin. It does mean that the right of self-defense will not be available to one who has substantially encouraged or provoked an attack. The general rule is that words alone are not enough to be considered a provocation under this standard, but there are exceptions. For example, saying ‘I am about to shoot you’ might well constitute sufficient provocation.

One of the circumstances which helps to determine the level of threat encountered by the victim is the nature of the assailant’s weapon (if any). As a general rule, anything which might be used to kill a person, no matter how odd, is considered a deadly weapon.

Thus, a chair, a lamp or a screwdriver may all be considered deadly weapons. In some instances, the law will treat a trained fighters hands as a deadly weapon, but in order to trigger the right to self-defense using lethal force against such a person, the victim must, of course, know of the attacker’s special training.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:09 pm

U.S. courts are split with respect to an additional factor in the lawfulness of the use of deadly force in self-defense. A minority of jurisdictions require a victim to retreat to the wall if it is safe to do so, before using deadly force. ‘Retreat to the wall’ is generally construed to mean taking any reasonable and apparent avenue of exit. However, even minority jurisdictions do not require retreat under three circumstances.

There is no duty to retreat from one’s own home, if one is being or has been robbed or raped, or if the victim is a police-officer making a lawful arrest. In 1996 the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that "although a person is afforded discretion in determining necessity, level and manner of force to defend one’s self, the right to use force in self defense is a qualified, not an absolute right." Pennsylvania is a retreat jurisdiction.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:10 pm

Even an initial aggressor may be given the right to self-defense under certain circumstances. If the initial aggressor withdraws from the confrontation, and communicates this withdrawal to the other party, he regains the right to self-defense. Also, if the victim of relatively minor aggression ‘suddenly escalates’ the confrontation to one involving deadly force, without providing adequate space for withdrawal, the initial aggressor may still invoke the right to self-defense.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 57100
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 7 guests

cron