Good talk on blocks

[Van Canna]

Farnam:

Layer Two: Functional invisibility.

We all need to practice to art of "being invisible." It is in our best interest to go our way unnoticed, both by potential predators and by the criminal justice system alike.

Whenever I travel, particularly to foreign countries, I endeavor to be the one that no one notices; no one recalls; no one remembers.

I silently slip through the radar, leaving no trace, a nameless, faceless tourist. When in any public place, I try to be clean and well groomed, but I never wear bright colors, any kind of jewelry, or anything shiny.

I smile a lot, but talk softly and as little as possible. As we say in the law enforcement business, "Courteous to everyone. Friendly to no one."

Loud talking, bright colors, Rolex watches, etc will consistently accumulate unwanted attention.

On the other end of the spectrum, tattoos, poor grooming, loud and offensive language, a slovenly appearance, etc will also garner unwelcome notice.

I would also include any kind of clothing...T-shirts or whatever that will send the message that you are some sort of martial artist. Sooner or later someone will want to teach some lesson.

Also if you wear such stuff and are somewhere when some psychopath barges in with a gun, you will be the first one he will shoot.

[Van Canna]

Farnam

Layer Three: Deselection.

Any successful predator has the ability to quickly screen potential victims, focusing in on the ones who look as if they will make good victims and rejecting those who either (1) look too strong for expedient victimization or (2) don't conveniently fall into any particular category.

When invisibility fails, we need endeavor to be consistently deselected for victimization.

We do this by making it a habit to appear alert, uninviting, self-confident, and strong. At the same time, we never loiter or appear indecisive.

We are always in motion.

"Weakness perceived is weakness exploited!"

[Van Canna]

Layer Four: Disengagement:

Our best interests are not served by any kind of engagement with potential predators. Successful disengagement involves posturing, bearing, verbalization, and movement.

It is in our best interest to disengage at the lowest reasonable force level, but we must simultaneously be prepared to instantly respond to unlawful force with superior force.

Potential predators, as they attempt verbal engagement, should be politely dismissed.

Bearing and eye contact should always project strength and confidence.

We should continuously be moving off the "line of force."

We should be observant in every direction, giving potential predator duos and trios the distinct impression that they will not be able to sneak up on us.

When predators are confused, they are unable to focus sufficiently to carry off their victimization. Therefore, never let a potential predator seize the agenda.

Don't answer his questions, and don't stay in any one place very long.

[Van Canna]

We should continuously be moving off the "line of force.

If you are a good Uechi tactical practitioner you would apply this concept in all the drills and free sparring.

You can leave the 'We stand our ground' to the idiots.

[Van Canna]

Disengagement, separation, and exit are our immediate goals when we have been selected or are being seriously evaluated by predators.

However, if there is to be a fight, the best one is a short one.

If a predator menaces me with a gun or a knife, I know that, before it is all over, there is a good chance that I will be shot or cut.

However, within that prison of circumstance, I also know that the faster I can end the fight, the less hurt I'm going to get!

If there must be a fight, I must explode into action, moving smoothly and quickly, in an effort to confuse and overwhelm my opponent before he has a chance to process all the information I'm throwing at him.

Ultimately, we must "have a plan." Potentially dangerous encounters must be thought about in advance. Decisions must be made.

Skills must be practiced. Confusion, hesitation, and vacillation will always attract the attention of predators and simultaneously stimulate predator behavior.

/John

~~~

Another good comment on the necessity to strike first and decisively as soon as we realize we are in jeopardy.

[Van Canna]

Shod feet, the most deadly weapon!

J. Farnam
Shod feet, the most deadly weapon!

From a friend close to this story:

"A teenage boy was beaten to death, in public, by a gang of thugs in Chicago last week. Much of the attack was recorded on video. The murder took less than a minute. To the bitter disappointment of the city's gaggle of hand-wringing, pseudo-sanctimonious politicians, no guns were involved!

Once again, we see how absolutely lethal are kicks to the head of a downed victim, particularly in the context of multiple assailants.

Although the initial impact that sent the victim to the ground was inflicted via a board or club or some kind, fatal damage was subsequently inflicted by the shod feet of the assailants.

This format of attack is common, and is far more dangerous than is realized by most. Fatal head-injury can be easily inflicted within seconds. Head trauma is extremely dangerous, and, due to the enclosed nature of the cranium, swelling of the brain will likely exacerbate injury."

Comment: From our perspective, it is imperative that, during such an attack, we avoid being rendered unconscious. Once on the ground, we must protect our head from multiple kicks and other blows, employing lethal force when necessary, and regain upright footing as rapidly as possible.

When your head is in contact with a solid object, blows directed at it are infinitely more injurious than when you are upright,, and your head is free to move with the blow.

Protect you head. It's the only one you have!

/John

[Van Canna]

Farnam

My best advice:

(1) Adopt a personal lifestyle that deliberately avoids dangerous places and situations

(2) Be alert and aware

(3) Exit potentially threatening circumstances early on, when you can

(4) Shoot (with precision), when you have no choice

(5) Stop shooting when threats are clearly abrogated

(6) Stay alert and get to a place of relative safety

(7) Call police at your first practical opportunity

(8) When police arrive, tell them just enough so that they understand whom you are and what role you played

(9) Otherwise, politely insist that your lawyer be personally present before answering questions, and thereafter

(10) Exercise your right to remain silent."

Comment: In addition, understand that whatever you do, chose not to do, or fail to do, it won't be perfect! Everyone, from media commentators, to investigators, to judges, to lawyers, to plaintiff's experts will wearisomely point out where, and how, you could have done it better.

And, to one degree or another, they'll be right!

Fortunately, the law doesn't require you to be perfect. The law only requires you to be "reasonable," whatever that means!

/John

[Van Canna]

The Experienced Thug Vs The Wanna Be Tough Guy

Darren laur

Having been in law enforcement for 26 years now, I have seen my share of “unnecessary” bar/street violence in all its forms (usually fueled by alcohol and/or drugs), and I have come to learn that those who are often feared for their brutality (The Experienced Thug) are often easier to talk down without having to resort to physical force than the young university jock who has had too much to drink and who thinks they are invincible (The Wanna Be Tough Guy).

The Experienced Thug understands that violence has several outcomes; possible jail time, severe injury which usually results in a hospital stay and even death. Because of this reality, the truly experienced thug does not usually engage in meaningless violence that is based on the “my dick is bigger than your dick” theory of physical engagement.

The experienced thug usually only resorts to violence when it meets their specific needs and on their terms. To the street thug, violence is “intentional” by design. To them, violence is not a game but rather a means to an end, and this is what makes them so dangerous, but in a way also predictable.

Often when deescalating a situation with the experienced thug , I found that framing the communication around the fact that the possible or likely outcomes will not be congruent with their needs is often enough to calm the situation; especially if you can make them believe that they are standing down on their terms and not yours.

The wanna be tough guy (WBTG) however, is the polar opposite of the the experienced thug. Usually given their younger age, their sense of entitlement and their lack of understanding specific to the real world outcomes of violence, the WBTG resorts to violence not because it is “intentional” by design, but rather a by product of a alcohol and/or drug induced testosterone dump designed to stoke their inflated “ego”.


When the WBTG has made a decision to “go” their is often no talking them down or giving them an opportunity to save face, even if the outcome or end game is not in their favor. They become “cognitively stupid” and this is what make them unpredictable and even dangerous if not controlled immediately.

Unlike the experienced thug who will take their lumps and walk away even if they lost the fight, the WBTG, even though they initiated the violence, will often cry “victim” if they loose and turn to the legal system to seek retribution and compensation from their intended target.

I have found that communication often was not sufficient in talking these guys down. Communication combined with overwhelming force presence in the form of backup (numbers) was what was needed.

Even then however, the WBTG sense of physical superiority often clouded their rational judgment, because they were cognitively stupid, causing them to go physical even when the odds were clearly not in their favor ,even though you were providing them with an out, and this is what makes these beasts dangerous.


Know thy enemy

Darren Laur

[Van Canna]

CANDANeh »

I just finished reading fascinating book by David Courtwright. "Violent Land" Single men and social disorder from the frontier to the inner city. Bold at times and it may shatter some individuals beliefs of "how the West was won". Interestingly enough his research into the past does expose trends in violence occurring today. I will share what I consider relevant statements in my next post.

Léo

[Van Canna]

CANDANeh »

The book will not provide answers on how to defend ourselves or how to react to violence. However, the author gives us an interesting look in our past with parallels to the emerging 'new' violence of today.

Not for the politically correct or those who fear the truth (he writes bluntly IMO). Nice old photo`s that I enjoyed and statistics I also found interesting.

Knowing more of where we came from (one more source to digest...as with any history) can help up paint on a bigger canvas.

Léo

[Van Canna]

There was a time when all of us, were considering the study of martial arts and stepped into a dojo, really believed that some training and eventually a 'Black Belt' made us invincible. We all have those memories and stupidities of it.

Many thought that such training gave them a license to be arrogant ass-holes and we have all seen examples of that.

Here is Sam Harris

Even then however, their sense of physical superiority often clouded their rational judgment, because they were cognitively stupid, causing them to go physical even when the odds were clearly not in their favor.

I once knew an experienced martial artist who decided to walk across Central Park late at night. He was aware of the danger, but he thought “I have a black belt in karate. Why shouldn’t I be able to walk wherever I want?”

As it happened, this rhetorical question was answered almost immediately: My friend hadn’t ventured more than a hundred yards into the darkness of the park before he was confronted by three men, one of whom plunged a hypodermic needle into his thigh without a word.

Our hero bolted and escaped, otherwise unharmed, but he spent the next three months wondering whether he had been infected with HIV, hepatitis, or some other blood-borne disease. (He was fine.) The lesson: Whatever your training, you needn’t be foolish.

[Van Canna]

Sam Harris

“What are you looking at, ass-hole?”

“Who are you calling an ass-hole?”

“You, bitch. What are you going to do about it?”

Nevertheless, we can be easily lured into social dominance games from which neither party can find a face-saving exit. The violence that erupts at such moments is as unnecessary as it is predictable. If you want to preserve your health and stay out of prison, you must learn to avoid or defuse conflict of this kind.

When a conflict turns physical, there is always a risk that someone will be severely injured or killed. Imagine spending a year or more in prison because you couldn’t resist punching some bully who dearly deserved it, but who then hit his head on a fire hydrant and died from a brain injury.

As a matter of law, the moment you engage in avoidable violence of this kind—rising to a challenge and escalating the conflict—you lose any legal claim to self-defense.

Rather, you were fighting—which is illegal—and in this case you accidentally killed your opponent. You are now likely to get more practice fighting in prison.

(Meanwhile, the costs of your criminal defense, and perhaps a subsequent civil lawsuit, could easily bankrupt you.) Take this maxim to heart: Self-defense is not about winning fights with aggressive men who probably have less to lose than you do.

Sound advice like this should be read and assimilated at regular intervals because it is very difficult to heed when under 'emotional high-jack'-

[Van Canna]

Sam Harris

As a teenager, I once had an opportunity to fly in a police helicopter over a major American city. Naively, I thought the experience might be uneventful.

Perhaps there would be no crime between 8:00 and 10:00 p.m. on a Saturday night. However, from the moment we were airborne, there was a fresh emergency every fifteen seconds: Shots fired… rape in progress… victim stabbed…It was a deluge.

Of course, the impression this left on me was, in part, the result of a sampling bias: I was hearing nothing but incident reports from a city of 4 million people, most of whom would never encounter violence directly.

(No one calls the police to say “Everything is still okay!”) Yet it was uncanny to discover the chaos that lurked at the margins of my daily routine. A few minutes from where I might otherwise have been eating dinner, rapes, robberies, and murders were in progress.

[Van Canna]

Another principle is lurking here that should be made explicit: Never threaten your opponent.

The purpose of his verbal challenge was to get you to respond in such a way as to make him feel justified in attacking you. You shouldn’t collaborate in this process or advertise your readiness to defend yourself.

Even if violence seems unavoidable, and you decide to strike preemptively, you should do so from a seemingly un-aggressive posture, retaining the element of surprise. (This requires training.) Putting up your dukes and agreeing to fight has no place in a self-defense repertoire.

Harris

[Van Canna]

“What are you looking at, ass-hole?”

“Sorry, man. I was just spacing out. It’s been a long day.”

De-escalate and move on.

Harris