© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
THIS may be a particularly appropriate piece of information now that the bustling and busy Holiday Season is upon us. With family and other social commitments, it may be the case that you are unable to maintain your normal schedule of physical training via comprehensive total body workouts.
When time is at a premium and you are next tempted to miss a scheduled exercise period, you will find the following abbreviated session a real convenience. While the workout we are about to suggest requires of you only two exercises, we assure you that these two exercises, properly done, will maintain your physical development and might even increase your strength.
The session of exercise that we recommend is a super-abbreviated program consisting of the SQUAT and the MILITARY PRESS. It is preferable to do these exercises with a barbell, but if a barbell is not available and you have only a pair of dumbells, that will do nicely. (Note: Because your pair of dumbells will almost certainly be a lot lighter when totaled than a barbell, we suggest — if this is so — that you use dumbells in a CLEAN AND PRESS, rather than in the simpler "military press" mode. The added work doing the clean with each repetition compensates for the lighter poundage being used. Naturally, if you train with heavy dumbells, this compensatory step can be omitted).
While we appreciate that some instructors might disagree with us, it is our opinion that it makes no difference whatever which of the two exercises you begin with. Our advice is: Do the two exercises in whichever order you fancy — just DO them!
Purely for the purpose of setting the schedule down for your reference, we select a "squat first, then military press" sequence.
Here is the mini-workout:
1. SQUAT — 1 SET OF 18-20 REPETITIONS, rest only long enough to get your breath back, then do 1 SET OF 8 REPETITIONS (being sure to add weight for this second set).
2. MILITARY PRESS — 1 SET OF 10 REPETITIONS, rest only long enough to recover your strength, then do 1 SET OF 6 REPETITIONS (again, adding weight for this second set).
While you must use heavy poundages, we wish to DEFINE precisely what that means, so that relative beginners and newcomers to sensible training are not misled: A "heavy poundage" is a poundage that makes YOU work hard, and that YOU feel is heavy. There is no arbitrary or objective standard (unless we were discussing competitive weight LIFTING, where specific records were being made and broken, according to fixed and known weight amounts). We are concerned with TRAINING; with WORKING OUT for all round development and conditioning, as well as to bolster our combative skills capabilities.
Always — A-L-W-A-Y-S — use weight resistance that you can properly work with. If it‘s heavy for you, then it‘s HEAVY. There is nothing competitive about this. Your goal is to build you up; not to lift or train with more weight on the bar than anyone else uses.
To be certain that you do this correctly, let us provide the correct pointers for training. Some of what follows is repetitive — BECAUSE IT’S IMPORTANT!:—
• Use weights that are heavy for you. Be certain that you are able to handle and work with whatever weights you use, properly. A good indicator that you‘re doing things correctly is when you feel the last one or two repetitions in a set to be a hard fight, ut the repetitions up them are simply "demanding". The last repetition or two should NOT involve "cheating", but should always be fought out in correct exercise form.
• Consciously focus on working each repetition through a full range movement and feel it all the way. No "bouncing" or "dropping" when squatting, and no "jerking" or "heaving" when pressing. If you cannot handle the weight that you are using in correct form, then USE A LIGHTER WEIGHT; you are NOT benefitting yourself by cheating!.
• Rest minimally between sets. The entire workout consists of only four sets, but when you do it you‘ll see that each one, done as we advise, takes a lot out of you. This means that you will not be able to "breeze through" the two exercises. Nevertheless, you are robbing yourself of valuable conditioning benefits if you rest too long between sets. "Too long" is resting beyond the moment when you feel that you can do the next set.
• Finish this mini-workout within 12 minutes if you possibly can. Do NOT allow yourself more than 15 minutes. If you can‘t do the workout in 15 minutes then you‘re using too much weight OR you are dawdling.
So-called "abbreviated workouts" such as this one were popularized by the late, great Peary Rader in his (then) marvelous periodical, IRONMAN MAGAZINE. Mr. Rader was one of the most sensible, honest, and realistic trainers in our Nation‘s history. The old IRONMAN reflected his wisdom and his immensely practical philosophy of training.
As Peary Rader pointed out, abbreviated workouts can be incredibly effective (sometimes triggering gains in individuals who found the usual full body workouts consisting of eight to twelve exercises to be too much). Normally, we recommend and prefer a comprehensive total body workout of between five and about ten or so individual exercises. Still, when well chosen, two or three exercises are enough — if you work them very hard — if a regular length routine is for the nonce not feasible.
The squat and the military press were the two exercises most responsible for developing Paul Anderson. Anderson was regarded as "The Strongest Man In The World", so don‘t worry about these two exercises not being effective!
For the dyed-in-the-wool training devotee who bitterly resents missing a workout or two (even if it is during the Holiday Season), and has no confidence in "short" workouts, we would offer some parting words of encouragement:
Peary Rader once noted that he was never able to see any difference between the physiques of men who took about an hour to train, and those who lived in the gym, and spent half the day at it.
Harry B. Paschall — one of our personal "heroes of the Iron Game", and a writer/teacher of matters pertaining to weight training, par excellence — always emphasized the value of REST as an aid to muscle building. In a classic article that he authored he once wrote that he never saw really outstanding development in those who trained compulsively and rigidly, but that he did see the best size and strength gains in those whose training was irregular.
We hope that we‘ve been of help to you here.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
So... Yeah...
Ahhh... a four-day weekend. Not the two-week, unpaid break that we'd been told to expect. It's bitter-sweet. On the one hand, obviously I couldn't afford to take two weeks off without pay. On the other... I'd already prepared myself to be broke and unhappy. Now I've had to shift gears. I'll be not-quite-so-broke... but still unhappy. We're not going to get enough hours to make up entirely for the days off.
The other thing that's got me down was that I was semi-psyched to use the off time to really crank on the Combato training sessions. I did manage to get started up again, during the first week of October. I've been averaging three sessions per week but was hoping to be able to get in six for during that two week break. Not happening now.
Of course, I'll be unemployed after January 18th... so it's likely that I'll have time to attend every class for a while. I'm almost ready to test for yellow belt already and I'd like to do that by the end of January. I'm stoked about that and anxious to get through it and begin the yellow belt training so I can hammer the green belt test in less than six months.
Right now I'm not sure if I'll wait out the break in service again and go back to MS or take a security gig and avoid the madness. The security job will mean working either swing or graveyard most likely.
I'd prefer graveyard. While this plays havoc on the sleep schedule, it means being able to attend Combato classes six times per week. Working swing means only being able to get in to the day-time classes which are Monday, Wednesday and Saturday. Then again... sometimes I feel like I don't get the house to myself enough... which would make swing shift more ideal.
The other thing that's got me down was that I was semi-psyched to use the off time to really crank on the Combato training sessions. I did manage to get started up again, during the first week of October. I've been averaging three sessions per week but was hoping to be able to get in six for during that two week break. Not happening now.
Of course, I'll be unemployed after January 18th... so it's likely that I'll have time to attend every class for a while. I'm almost ready to test for yellow belt already and I'd like to do that by the end of January. I'm stoked about that and anxious to get through it and begin the yellow belt training so I can hammer the green belt test in less than six months.
Right now I'm not sure if I'll wait out the break in service again and go back to MS or take a security gig and avoid the madness. The security job will mean working either swing or graveyard most likely.
I'd prefer graveyard. While this plays havoc on the sleep schedule, it means being able to attend Combato classes six times per week. Working swing means only being able to get in to the day-time classes which are Monday, Wednesday and Saturday. Then again... sometimes I feel like I don't get the house to myself enough... which would make swing shift more ideal.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Involuntary Occurrences In Combat
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
A correspondent who is involved in combat handgun training wrote that he wanted to know the scoop on correct trigger control. He had been told by an instructor at a rather well-know shooting facility that "one must squeeze the trigger and achieve a 'surprise break' when engaging an enemy in combat". We must add that this was taught in conjunction with the idea that, while applying this trigger squeeze, he was also to keep his eye on the front sight.
Having been a personal, certified student of the late Jeff Cooper (who promulgated the ideas which this shooting school is touting) as well as a student of the late Col. Rex Applegate and a student of a man who had trained personally under William Fairbairn, during WWII, I know the fallacy inherent in what my correspondent was taught at the shooting school.
The method of handgun employment that Jeff Cooper promoted, and that is still in some circles being promoted, is a competition, sporting method. It was in fact DEVELOPED DIRECTLY AS A RESULT OF COMPETITIVE SHOOTING EXPERIENCE, NOT AS A RESULT OF STUDYING OR PARTICIPATING IN COMBAT. The method taught by Fairbairn and Applegate (which Applegate personally certified us to teach) WAS developed directly as a result of experiences in and studies of real world close combat handgun shooting.
In actual close combat one cannot "squeeze" a trigger, deliberately. One PULLS the trigger. One cannot "focus on the front sight", either. NOT AT CLOSE RANGES, WHERE ACTUAL ENCOUNTERS USING HANDGUNS OCCUR. Focusing on the sights and squeezing the trigger while breathing slowly is appropriate for deliberate aimed and sighted DISTANCE firing — of both handguns and shoulder weapons. But in combat at ranges of about 20 feet or less, one‘s organism functions in a manner that precludes certain actions from being employed. Competition shooting (just like competition unarmed sporting "combat") DOES NOT CORRELATE IN THE LEAST WITH ACTUAL COMBAT.
Professionals know this, and while others continue to believe that what one can do and accomplish on the mat or on the range is identical with that which is suitable to BATTLE, the truth remains true. You cannot function in close combat using fine motor articulations, elaborate and complex movements, or actions that assume conditions and circumstances that can only be assured in a sporting or in a competitive venue.
We do not now see, and have never seen, that any conflict need exist between sporting training and participation, and combat training. However, many continue to feel that it does. This misleads a lot of people who are led to accept that what they train in for competition (armed or/and unarmed) translates into what ought to be developed for close combat and self-defense.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and the widespread belief (encouraged, unfortunately, by the mainstream periodicals which exist solely to sell magazines and advertisers‘ products) that "competition" prepares one for "combat" remains NONSENSE.
Please remember when you train that the following occurs INVOLUNTARILY in a close combat situation. It does not occur until or unless the organism feels itself to be in imminent serious danger. And while in many instances no heed need be paid whatever to the following factors during controlled practice (unarmed and hand-to-hand work, or armed range firing or practice drill with knives and sticks, etc.) unless one accepts their reality when selecting which methods to train in, one will not be able to use those methods for real.
1. In any hand-to-hand and close combat situation one loses the ability to employ fine motor skills. Only gross body movements are possible.
2. One invariably locks on visually to an enemy in close combat. and can see nothing else. Psychologists call this the "peripheral optic dysfunction phenomenon".
3. Adrenaline surges through one‘s system as one‘s blood pressure soars. This precludes doing ANYTHING complicated, but facilitates anything of a gross muscle nature being employed. Example: One would not be able to dial the phone for assistance while a home invader was charging one from a distance of three feet. But one WOULD be able to pick up the phone and smash it into the invader‘s face!
We always elaborate upon these and other factors when teaching, and the articles that we post on www.seattlecombatives.com emphasize these and other relevant points, constantly. For right now, PLEASE, just appreciate what we‘re saying. We speak not merely from our personal lifetime of study, training, and experience, but from and for that which hundreds of real world combatants (in military, law enforcement, protective service, and intelligence functions) have documented.
If, may God forbid, you ever find yourself embroiled in a life-threatening situation where you must employ close combat an self-defense skills to save yourself and perhaps a loved one, you will then know the truth of that about which we speak, teach, and write.
Please don‘t wait for that to happen.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
A correspondent who is involved in combat handgun training wrote that he wanted to know the scoop on correct trigger control. He had been told by an instructor at a rather well-know shooting facility that "one must squeeze the trigger and achieve a 'surprise break' when engaging an enemy in combat". We must add that this was taught in conjunction with the idea that, while applying this trigger squeeze, he was also to keep his eye on the front sight.
Having been a personal, certified student of the late Jeff Cooper (who promulgated the ideas which this shooting school is touting) as well as a student of the late Col. Rex Applegate and a student of a man who had trained personally under William Fairbairn, during WWII, I know the fallacy inherent in what my correspondent was taught at the shooting school.
The method of handgun employment that Jeff Cooper promoted, and that is still in some circles being promoted, is a competition, sporting method. It was in fact DEVELOPED DIRECTLY AS A RESULT OF COMPETITIVE SHOOTING EXPERIENCE, NOT AS A RESULT OF STUDYING OR PARTICIPATING IN COMBAT. The method taught by Fairbairn and Applegate (which Applegate personally certified us to teach) WAS developed directly as a result of experiences in and studies of real world close combat handgun shooting.
In actual close combat one cannot "squeeze" a trigger, deliberately. One PULLS the trigger. One cannot "focus on the front sight", either. NOT AT CLOSE RANGES, WHERE ACTUAL ENCOUNTERS USING HANDGUNS OCCUR. Focusing on the sights and squeezing the trigger while breathing slowly is appropriate for deliberate aimed and sighted DISTANCE firing — of both handguns and shoulder weapons. But in combat at ranges of about 20 feet or less, one‘s organism functions in a manner that precludes certain actions from being employed. Competition shooting (just like competition unarmed sporting "combat") DOES NOT CORRELATE IN THE LEAST WITH ACTUAL COMBAT.
Professionals know this, and while others continue to believe that what one can do and accomplish on the mat or on the range is identical with that which is suitable to BATTLE, the truth remains true. You cannot function in close combat using fine motor articulations, elaborate and complex movements, or actions that assume conditions and circumstances that can only be assured in a sporting or in a competitive venue.
We do not now see, and have never seen, that any conflict need exist between sporting training and participation, and combat training. However, many continue to feel that it does. This misleads a lot of people who are led to accept that what they train in for competition (armed or/and unarmed) translates into what ought to be developed for close combat and self-defense.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and the widespread belief (encouraged, unfortunately, by the mainstream periodicals which exist solely to sell magazines and advertisers‘ products) that "competition" prepares one for "combat" remains NONSENSE.
Please remember when you train that the following occurs INVOLUNTARILY in a close combat situation. It does not occur until or unless the organism feels itself to be in imminent serious danger. And while in many instances no heed need be paid whatever to the following factors during controlled practice (unarmed and hand-to-hand work, or armed range firing or practice drill with knives and sticks, etc.) unless one accepts their reality when selecting which methods to train in, one will not be able to use those methods for real.
1. In any hand-to-hand and close combat situation one loses the ability to employ fine motor skills. Only gross body movements are possible.
2. One invariably locks on visually to an enemy in close combat. and can see nothing else. Psychologists call this the "peripheral optic dysfunction phenomenon".
3. Adrenaline surges through one‘s system as one‘s blood pressure soars. This precludes doing ANYTHING complicated, but facilitates anything of a gross muscle nature being employed. Example: One would not be able to dial the phone for assistance while a home invader was charging one from a distance of three feet. But one WOULD be able to pick up the phone and smash it into the invader‘s face!
We always elaborate upon these and other factors when teaching, and the articles that we post on www.seattlecombatives.com emphasize these and other relevant points, constantly. For right now, PLEASE, just appreciate what we‘re saying. We speak not merely from our personal lifetime of study, training, and experience, but from and for that which hundreds of real world combatants (in military, law enforcement, protective service, and intelligence functions) have documented.
If, may God forbid, you ever find yourself embroiled in a life-threatening situation where you must employ close combat an self-defense skills to save yourself and perhaps a loved one, you will then know the truth of that about which we speak, teach, and write.
Please don‘t wait for that to happen.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Fight Science
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
[Blogger note: The episode mentioned is Fight Science: Fighting Back]
ONE of our Black Belts called our attention to a new edition of a show called "Fight Science". Segments may be accessed on the National Geographic Channel. We googled the Show and thought much of what was presented to be quite good (with the sole exception of what appeared to us to be a rather misguided "defense" against a drunk, by a UFC fighter). Blows that were advocated by the defense experts in this Show were excellent, and on the money. The ear box, smashing the throat, attacking the eyes, biting — all excellent and very reliable material.
It is obvious to all — save possibly those with all of their irons in the MMA/Cage/UFC fire — that vicious and powerful BLOWS to the body‘s most vulnerable and vital target areas constitute the way to go for real world combat and defense. One need only see how absurd , when juxtaposed to the striking and gouging methods, the grappling demonstration was. At least this is our personal opinion. We realize that no one amongst the True Believing New Breed Of Grappling/Competition-Is-The-Way-To-Go crowd would or could ever permit themselves to see our point.
We‘re writing, as we always have been, to the real world oriented MINORITY.
Check out that Fight Science presentation. It‘s worth watching. There are two male instructors and one female, plus a Navy SEAL, who are very impressive.
We applaud the producers of this excellent Show.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
[Blogger note: The episode mentioned is Fight Science: Fighting Back]
ONE of our Black Belts called our attention to a new edition of a show called "Fight Science". Segments may be accessed on the National Geographic Channel. We googled the Show and thought much of what was presented to be quite good (with the sole exception of what appeared to us to be a rather misguided "defense" against a drunk, by a UFC fighter). Blows that were advocated by the defense experts in this Show were excellent, and on the money. The ear box, smashing the throat, attacking the eyes, biting — all excellent and very reliable material.
It is obvious to all — save possibly those with all of their irons in the MMA/Cage/UFC fire — that vicious and powerful BLOWS to the body‘s most vulnerable and vital target areas constitute the way to go for real world combat and defense. One need only see how absurd , when juxtaposed to the striking and gouging methods, the grappling demonstration was. At least this is our personal opinion. We realize that no one amongst the True Believing New Breed Of Grappling/Competition-Is-The-Way-To-Go crowd would or could ever permit themselves to see our point.
We‘re writing, as we always have been, to the real world oriented MINORITY.
Check out that Fight Science presentation. It‘s worth watching. There are two male instructors and one female, plus a Navy SEAL, who are very impressive.
We applaud the producers of this excellent Show.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Holiday Cautions
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
WHILE Christmas is the most beautiful time of year, and it is difficult for many to believe this, it is nevertheless a fact that at this time of year crime — especially violent crime — often tends to escalate. This is because of the deep-seated discontent of so many people who are embittered by their personal situation. Christmas time, when many people have loved ones and friends with whom to share the holiday experience, can be a lonely, sad, and very frustrating time for many. Some of those "many" lash out.
The present horrific economic situation that we ALL are in has affected some people much more than it has affected others. Hopelessness, which many, unfortunately, have been made to feel by that which is transpiring, can be an enraging feeling. Often, when people feel hopeless and a knowing sense of "what‘s the use" they see no reason to contain, control, or even make any further effort to understand their rage. They do not want to see others happy. They feel resentment toward others who are happy, and they want to attack.
This is a dark and often unacknowledged side to the festive Christmas Season, and we do not call your attention to it in order to dampen whatever happiness, joy, and satisfaction may be your personal blessing at this time of year. We raise this point in order to assist you in that which it is our mission to assist you on doing: PROTECTING YOURSELF, YOUR LOVED ONES, AND YOUR PROPERTY.
Robbery escalates at this time of year. Shoppers must be very careful when they park, exit, lock up, and later return to their vehicles. Here‘s a tip for lady shoppers:
ALWAYS KEEP A LARGE MAN’S HAT WITH YOU WHENEVER YOU DRIVE ANYWHERE, ALONE. PLACE THAT HAT CONSPICUOUSLY OVER THE WHEEL OR THE DASHBOARD SO THAT ANYONE GLANCING INTO THE VEHICLE IS IMMEDIATELY LED TO BELIEVE THAT A BIG MAN IS THE DRIVER. This can prevent some forms of crime that involve violence against women.
Do not leave anything on the seats or anywhere in your vehicle that might tempt any punk to pull a "smash and run".
Always LOCK YOUR VEHICLE DOOR the moment you enter. Always visually inspect the inside of your vehicle BEFORE you enter it. RUN if anyone is inside — NEVER attempt to confront any criminal when you do not have to do so.
Try to always park your vehicle as near as possible to the mall or store entrance. You do not want to walk any significant distance burdened with packages.
It is certainly our sincerest wish and hope that you and yours encounter only pleasant and joyful situations during this Christmas Season. But it never hurts to be cautious — just in case.
Sword and Pen – December 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
WHILE Christmas is the most beautiful time of year, and it is difficult for many to believe this, it is nevertheless a fact that at this time of year crime — especially violent crime — often tends to escalate. This is because of the deep-seated discontent of so many people who are embittered by their personal situation. Christmas time, when many people have loved ones and friends with whom to share the holiday experience, can be a lonely, sad, and very frustrating time for many. Some of those "many" lash out.
The present horrific economic situation that we ALL are in has affected some people much more than it has affected others. Hopelessness, which many, unfortunately, have been made to feel by that which is transpiring, can be an enraging feeling. Often, when people feel hopeless and a knowing sense of "what‘s the use" they see no reason to contain, control, or even make any further effort to understand their rage. They do not want to see others happy. They feel resentment toward others who are happy, and they want to attack.
This is a dark and often unacknowledged side to the festive Christmas Season, and we do not call your attention to it in order to dampen whatever happiness, joy, and satisfaction may be your personal blessing at this time of year. We raise this point in order to assist you in that which it is our mission to assist you on doing: PROTECTING YOURSELF, YOUR LOVED ONES, AND YOUR PROPERTY.
Robbery escalates at this time of year. Shoppers must be very careful when they park, exit, lock up, and later return to their vehicles. Here‘s a tip for lady shoppers:
ALWAYS KEEP A LARGE MAN’S HAT WITH YOU WHENEVER YOU DRIVE ANYWHERE, ALONE. PLACE THAT HAT CONSPICUOUSLY OVER THE WHEEL OR THE DASHBOARD SO THAT ANYONE GLANCING INTO THE VEHICLE IS IMMEDIATELY LED TO BELIEVE THAT A BIG MAN IS THE DRIVER. This can prevent some forms of crime that involve violence against women.
Do not leave anything on the seats or anywhere in your vehicle that might tempt any punk to pull a "smash and run".
Always LOCK YOUR VEHICLE DOOR the moment you enter. Always visually inspect the inside of your vehicle BEFORE you enter it. RUN if anyone is inside — NEVER attempt to confront any criminal when you do not have to do so.
Try to always park your vehicle as near as possible to the mall or store entrance. You do not want to walk any significant distance burdened with packages.
It is certainly our sincerest wish and hope that you and yours encounter only pleasant and joyful situations during this Christmas Season. But it never hurts to be cautious — just in case.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
"Local" Updates...
Large whoop... My contract finally got renewed so I'll be there until mid-January. Then i get to takemy 100-dy break in service. So basically eight weeks left... and three of those are going to be off site because the campus is closed over the holidays. We already went through the Thanksgiving break... and I'll be hurting from that due to no pay. The weeks of Christmas and New Years are going to be the same way. So I lose three weeks of my final eight in this contract.
When the break comes I'm not certiain what I'm going to do. I don't expect that there will be a lot of manual testing positions. I haven't seen many openings for security positions. I may be trying to live off of unemployment again. I'm also considering looking hard at some home based businesses.
I would honestly prefer not to have to go back into testing at all, but I'm going ot beed to have a steady income of some kind. How I hate this industry. I really do want out of it.
I've nearly built the savings back up and I'm hopeful that I can be ready to apply for training by the end of January. After that I'll still need ot save another $3,000or more.
When the break comes I'm not certiain what I'm going to do. I don't expect that there will be a lot of manual testing positions. I haven't seen many openings for security positions. I may be trying to live off of unemployment again. I'm also considering looking hard at some home based businesses.
I would honestly prefer not to have to go back into testing at all, but I'm going ot beed to have a steady income of some kind. How I hate this industry. I really do want out of it.
I've nearly built the savings back up and I'm hopeful that I can be ready to apply for training by the end of January. After that I'll still need ot save another $3,000or more.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Genetics And Individual Development
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Unfortunately, an acceptance of reality is not one of the more conspicuous characteristics of the thinking style of most of those who participate in the martial arts. "Mystique" is what one of our teachers, Charlie Nelson, used to call it. We think that he was being polite, however. Irrational, unrealistic, absurd, and self-defeating foolishness appears to us to be more appropriate. Something as innocent as a "mystique" can actually prove merely to be a charming "added attraction". Thus, if you find that the pursuit of whichever martial path you enjoy to be enhanced by some mystique, that’s okay. But if you allow yourself to abandon truth, facts, and reality because that which you participate in is essentially teaching you nonsense, and the "teacher" of that system simply does not know the reality of that which he purports to be disseminating as doctrine, you’re potentially doing great harm to yourself.
We have been intimately and professionally involved in the physical training and martial arts fields since the early 1960’s, and the mid-1950’s, respectively. In both fields we have noticed that participants and so-called "teachers" alike have tended to ignore an extremely important factor when pursuing their activities: GENETICS. That is, those hereditary factors that predispose the individual to agility, hand/eye coordination, strength, athleticism, favorable or unfavorable bone and muscular structural development, etc. Insofar as the physical training aspect is concerned, suffice it now to say that, while everyone can build strength and muscle and become much more efficient and effective physically if he follows a progressive, systematic plan of weight training exercise, only those with the right genetics can become "world class" physical specimens, or outstanding strength athletes. That's the way it is.
But let’s talk about the primary subject of this Newsletter: The armed and unarmed combat arts, close-in hand-to-hand fighting, and self-defense. And let’s make totally clear that which many simply do not understand, or have been misled about: i.e the critical role of genetics in determining that which can and cannot likely be achieved by the student through training, and the inevitable effect that one’s genetic predispositions have in determining one’s ultimate development as a physical combatant.
First, some encouraging facts:
1. Anyone, except perhaps the severely handicapped and/or those who are unfortunately physically crippled or sick, can develop a serious, formidable capability in close combat and self-defense. The only requirement is strong desire, hard work, patience, and determination, coupled with sound instruction and reliable, professional guidance.
2. One does not need great natural strength, unusual agility, particularly superior hand/eye coordination, or much athletic talent to master practical, realistic, modern personal combat and defensive skills. These skills are well within the capabilities of statistically quite average people to master, and even excel in.
3. A "genetically inferior" individual who has developed his capabilities and skills in close combat can defeat a "genetically superior" individual who has not similarly developed his capabilities.
4. There are numerous tactics and strategies that are integral to the study of modern and practical close combat and self-defense that can make "genetic advantages" in adversaries virtually irrelevant, providing these tactics and strategies are applied quickly enough, and with cunning and skill.
5. Weapons — which are a natural part of close combat and self-defense training, when this subject is properly taught — trump "genetic superiority" when and if the genetically superior party is unarmed. At the very least weapons EQUALIZE, and place anyone on an even keel with anyone else who is similarly armed, when weapons are involved. I.e. If a frail 80 year old man who knows how to use it is in possession of a .45 automatic, and if he is confronting a 20 year old home invader who is also armed with a .45 pistol, the age, strength, and size differences between the two matter not a bit. Each is equally capable of dropping the other; and all that matters is "who gets who first". (And, when an intended victim is, happily, armed with a powerful handgun, and his would-be killer or tormentor is not, the odds are overwhelmingly with the intended victim. — no matter how great the victimizer’s size, strength, age, etc. advantage may be!)
6. Genetics is important; but when considering all factors involved and concerned, genetics is NOT the decisive factor in close combat or in emergency defense situations.
Now, let’s point out how and why, despite the above, this matter of genetics is so critical a matter to understand for those who pursue martial arts for self-defense.
First, remember that, unless you possess the requisite natural flexibility and physiology you can be seriously and permanently injured if you elect to train in any martial art that demands constant and extreme training for maximum flexibility. There is real danger here, in other words, for the individual who undertakes the study of certain martial arts in which maximum stretching is demanded of students, and high kicks are invariably part of the program. Those individuals with the inherent flexibility can easily train to do all sorts of high and acrobatic kicks, and stretch to their heart’s (and to their instructor’s) content. But NO ONE who does not possess this inherent capacity should do any extreme stretching. The ligaments and tendons can be permanently damaged by this; the hips can be permanently injured, and severe muscle strains and even tears can occur. When a student is very young (early to late teens, and even through to his mid-20’s) he can often "get away" with doing a great deal of extreme stretching, and not suffer badly for it. But this becomes a dangerous practice once one he approaches the age of 30, if he isn’t genetically predisposed to great natural flexibility.
Second, unless you have naturally large, strong hands,and — preferably — fairly thick and heavy fingers, you are virtually wasting your time training in the popular "wrist turning" and wrist-twisting and control actions. Adversaries who are heavy-boned and naturally strong can easily resist and pull away from any "expert" whose hands and fingers are relatively diminutive (i.e. small boned) and who attempts to apply the popular ju-jutsu type kote-gaeshi grips. (Note: We do not recommend these techniques at all for anyone; however, they are simply useless for the person with small, fragile hands. The only effective application that such an individual could enjoy with such holds is when working with a cooperative partner or a non resisting opponent — quite unlikely in a real situation!)
Third, "hard" linear (ie Shotokan karate style) blocks require great power and strong arms and hands or they are entirely worthless against stronger, determined assailants who come in with powerful, fully committed attacks — with or without a weapon of some kind in their hand. A physically diminutive person who attempts a hard block against a vicious, powerful attacker who comes at him, will FAIL to stop the attack with his block.
Fourth, if your "self-defense" program advocates clenched fist punching, then WATCH OUT! For, unless you possess the strength and hand structure that at least allows for strong punches to be delivered, your "punches" stand NO CHANCE of even bothering, let alone stopping, a large, strong attacker.
Fifth, Raw strength — much more than "finesse" and skill — is required to pull off many of the popularly taught throwing actions of judo or (what is often mislabeled as, but nonetheless taught as) ju-jutsu.
Sixth, FORGET COMPLETELY about being able to secure an immobilizing hold on any dangerous and determined enemy in a serious hand-to-hand encounter (except perhaps a strangle or choke hold) unless you are very agile and very strong.
Seventh, the truth is that numerous martial arts systems depend, due to the manner in which they are constructed and taught, on the participant’s possessing very specific physiological characteristics in order to reach a high level of PRACTICAL proficiency. In this regard note how the very advanced individuals in some arts tend to possess very similarly structured physiques and inherent characteristics.
What all of this means is simply that you must be realistic and pragmatic when approaching the study of close combat and self-defense. Unless you possess the right genetics, many classical/traditional skills are totally worthless. And, if you are smart and go to a combat/self-defense system of merit (watch out, many are simply classical/traditional or sporting/competitive methods that have been "renamed" for commercial purposes!) then you need to appreciate the role of genetics in your training. DO NOT BE LED TO BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN, WITHOUT THE HEREDITARY POTENTIAL, EQUAL THE STRENGTH AND SPEED OF MOVEMENT, OR THE AGILITY, DEMONSTRATED IN PRACTICE, THAT A NATURALLY BLESSED PERSON WITH THE GENETIC ADVANTAGES IS CAPABLE OF EVIDENCING.
JUST ABOUT ANYONE CAN BECOME EXPERT IN PRACTICAL, REALISTIC SELF-DEFENSE AND CLOSE COMBAT METHODS; BUT, AS WITH ALL THINGS PHYSICAL, NOT EVERYONE CAN BECOME AN EXCEPTIONAL, AND OUTSTANDING TECHNICAL PERFORMER.
Do not let any of this bother you. Just be self-accepting and realistic, and approach this matter of acquiring physical combative capabilities with the same common sense and realism that you (hopefully) employ when approaching the study of any other subject.
Excise the "mystery", the "fantastic", the "secret", and the impossible forever from your thinking. No matter what you read, hear, or are told by anyone regarding martial arts and self-defense.
Bradley J. Steiner
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Unfortunately, an acceptance of reality is not one of the more conspicuous characteristics of the thinking style of most of those who participate in the martial arts. "Mystique" is what one of our teachers, Charlie Nelson, used to call it. We think that he was being polite, however. Irrational, unrealistic, absurd, and self-defeating foolishness appears to us to be more appropriate. Something as innocent as a "mystique" can actually prove merely to be a charming "added attraction". Thus, if you find that the pursuit of whichever martial path you enjoy to be enhanced by some mystique, that’s okay. But if you allow yourself to abandon truth, facts, and reality because that which you participate in is essentially teaching you nonsense, and the "teacher" of that system simply does not know the reality of that which he purports to be disseminating as doctrine, you’re potentially doing great harm to yourself.
We have been intimately and professionally involved in the physical training and martial arts fields since the early 1960’s, and the mid-1950’s, respectively. In both fields we have noticed that participants and so-called "teachers" alike have tended to ignore an extremely important factor when pursuing their activities: GENETICS. That is, those hereditary factors that predispose the individual to agility, hand/eye coordination, strength, athleticism, favorable or unfavorable bone and muscular structural development, etc. Insofar as the physical training aspect is concerned, suffice it now to say that, while everyone can build strength and muscle and become much more efficient and effective physically if he follows a progressive, systematic plan of weight training exercise, only those with the right genetics can become "world class" physical specimens, or outstanding strength athletes. That's the way it is.
But let’s talk about the primary subject of this Newsletter: The armed and unarmed combat arts, close-in hand-to-hand fighting, and self-defense. And let’s make totally clear that which many simply do not understand, or have been misled about: i.e the critical role of genetics in determining that which can and cannot likely be achieved by the student through training, and the inevitable effect that one’s genetic predispositions have in determining one’s ultimate development as a physical combatant.
First, some encouraging facts:
1. Anyone, except perhaps the severely handicapped and/or those who are unfortunately physically crippled or sick, can develop a serious, formidable capability in close combat and self-defense. The only requirement is strong desire, hard work, patience, and determination, coupled with sound instruction and reliable, professional guidance.
2. One does not need great natural strength, unusual agility, particularly superior hand/eye coordination, or much athletic talent to master practical, realistic, modern personal combat and defensive skills. These skills are well within the capabilities of statistically quite average people to master, and even excel in.
3. A "genetically inferior" individual who has developed his capabilities and skills in close combat can defeat a "genetically superior" individual who has not similarly developed his capabilities.
4. There are numerous tactics and strategies that are integral to the study of modern and practical close combat and self-defense that can make "genetic advantages" in adversaries virtually irrelevant, providing these tactics and strategies are applied quickly enough, and with cunning and skill.
5. Weapons — which are a natural part of close combat and self-defense training, when this subject is properly taught — trump "genetic superiority" when and if the genetically superior party is unarmed. At the very least weapons EQUALIZE, and place anyone on an even keel with anyone else who is similarly armed, when weapons are involved. I.e. If a frail 80 year old man who knows how to use it is in possession of a .45 automatic, and if he is confronting a 20 year old home invader who is also armed with a .45 pistol, the age, strength, and size differences between the two matter not a bit. Each is equally capable of dropping the other; and all that matters is "who gets who first". (And, when an intended victim is, happily, armed with a powerful handgun, and his would-be killer or tormentor is not, the odds are overwhelmingly with the intended victim. — no matter how great the victimizer’s size, strength, age, etc. advantage may be!)
6. Genetics is important; but when considering all factors involved and concerned, genetics is NOT the decisive factor in close combat or in emergency defense situations.
Now, let’s point out how and why, despite the above, this matter of genetics is so critical a matter to understand for those who pursue martial arts for self-defense.
First, remember that, unless you possess the requisite natural flexibility and physiology you can be seriously and permanently injured if you elect to train in any martial art that demands constant and extreme training for maximum flexibility. There is real danger here, in other words, for the individual who undertakes the study of certain martial arts in which maximum stretching is demanded of students, and high kicks are invariably part of the program. Those individuals with the inherent flexibility can easily train to do all sorts of high and acrobatic kicks, and stretch to their heart’s (and to their instructor’s) content. But NO ONE who does not possess this inherent capacity should do any extreme stretching. The ligaments and tendons can be permanently damaged by this; the hips can be permanently injured, and severe muscle strains and even tears can occur. When a student is very young (early to late teens, and even through to his mid-20’s) he can often "get away" with doing a great deal of extreme stretching, and not suffer badly for it. But this becomes a dangerous practice once one he approaches the age of 30, if he isn’t genetically predisposed to great natural flexibility.
Second, unless you have naturally large, strong hands,and — preferably — fairly thick and heavy fingers, you are virtually wasting your time training in the popular "wrist turning" and wrist-twisting and control actions. Adversaries who are heavy-boned and naturally strong can easily resist and pull away from any "expert" whose hands and fingers are relatively diminutive (i.e. small boned) and who attempts to apply the popular ju-jutsu type kote-gaeshi grips. (Note: We do not recommend these techniques at all for anyone; however, they are simply useless for the person with small, fragile hands. The only effective application that such an individual could enjoy with such holds is when working with a cooperative partner or a non resisting opponent — quite unlikely in a real situation!)
Third, "hard" linear (ie Shotokan karate style) blocks require great power and strong arms and hands or they are entirely worthless against stronger, determined assailants who come in with powerful, fully committed attacks — with or without a weapon of some kind in their hand. A physically diminutive person who attempts a hard block against a vicious, powerful attacker who comes at him, will FAIL to stop the attack with his block.
Fourth, if your "self-defense" program advocates clenched fist punching, then WATCH OUT! For, unless you possess the strength and hand structure that at least allows for strong punches to be delivered, your "punches" stand NO CHANCE of even bothering, let alone stopping, a large, strong attacker.
Fifth, Raw strength — much more than "finesse" and skill — is required to pull off many of the popularly taught throwing actions of judo or (what is often mislabeled as, but nonetheless taught as) ju-jutsu.
Sixth, FORGET COMPLETELY about being able to secure an immobilizing hold on any dangerous and determined enemy in a serious hand-to-hand encounter (except perhaps a strangle or choke hold) unless you are very agile and very strong.
Seventh, the truth is that numerous martial arts systems depend, due to the manner in which they are constructed and taught, on the participant’s possessing very specific physiological characteristics in order to reach a high level of PRACTICAL proficiency. In this regard note how the very advanced individuals in some arts tend to possess very similarly structured physiques and inherent characteristics.
What all of this means is simply that you must be realistic and pragmatic when approaching the study of close combat and self-defense. Unless you possess the right genetics, many classical/traditional skills are totally worthless. And, if you are smart and go to a combat/self-defense system of merit (watch out, many are simply classical/traditional or sporting/competitive methods that have been "renamed" for commercial purposes!) then you need to appreciate the role of genetics in your training. DO NOT BE LED TO BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN, WITHOUT THE HEREDITARY POTENTIAL, EQUAL THE STRENGTH AND SPEED OF MOVEMENT, OR THE AGILITY, DEMONSTRATED IN PRACTICE, THAT A NATURALLY BLESSED PERSON WITH THE GENETIC ADVANTAGES IS CAPABLE OF EVIDENCING.
JUST ABOUT ANYONE CAN BECOME EXPERT IN PRACTICAL, REALISTIC SELF-DEFENSE AND CLOSE COMBAT METHODS; BUT, AS WITH ALL THINGS PHYSICAL, NOT EVERYONE CAN BECOME AN EXCEPTIONAL, AND OUTSTANDING TECHNICAL PERFORMER.
Do not let any of this bother you. Just be self-accepting and realistic, and approach this matter of acquiring physical combative capabilities with the same common sense and realism that you (hopefully) employ when approaching the study of any other subject.
Excise the "mystery", the "fantastic", the "secret", and the impossible forever from your thinking. No matter what you read, hear, or are told by anyone regarding martial arts and self-defense.
Bradley J. Steiner
Monday, November 9, 2009
My Strategy For "Surviving" The Holidays
By Charles Staley, B.Sc, MSS
Director, Staley Training Systems
http://www.staleytraining.com
Getting through the winter holiday season without gaining 10-15 pounds never seemed like much of an issue to me personally, but based on all the questions I've been fielding about it lately, I thought I'd share my own thoughts on effectively handling the period of time stretching roughly from December 24th to January 1st.
First, Keep Things In Perspective
We're only talking about 9 days here, max. So even thought I hate doing thermodynamic "worst case" hypotheticals, remember that if you ate 3500 calories in excess of your metabolic requirements each of those 9 days, you'd only gain 9 pounds.
Now, I gotcha- no one wants to gain 9 pounds over the holidays, but look how much work it'd take to do that: if your daily caloric requirement is 2500 calories, you'd have to eat 6000 calories a day, every day for the entire 9 days to gain 9 pounds of fat! Using a less extreme and slightly more likely scenario, gaining 5 pounds over the holidays would require eating about 4500 calories a day for 9 days. That's a lot, don't you agree?
Having Your Cake And Eating It Too
Most people have time off from work over the holidays, which theoretically should open up some time and energy to get in some extra-productive training- that's for starters. Yeah, you'll have family in town, you'll have parties to attend, but the point remains. So there shouldn't really be any reason to become totally sedentary for 9 days.
Given that, why not plan a handful of strategic eating opportunities, enjoy the experience, and leave the guilt-trip for your in-laws? For example, why not completely gorge yourself on Christmas Eve and Christmas day, and likewise on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day? That's 4 days total.
If you ate an additional 3500 calories on each of those 4 days, you might potentially gain 4 pounds. But- and this is a significant point- that's a lot of extra eating. Even if you ate yourself silly on those 4 days, you're unlikely to reach the 14,000-calorie surplus necessary to gain 4 pounds.
Draw A Line In The Sand- Somewhere.
Now in case you're thinking I live in a cave somewhere and don't really understand that the average American starts the "holidays" a few days before Thanksgiving and ends them in mid-January, believe me, I get it. So if you're one of those people, let me suggest a neat little self-help tactic that I really like. It's called "setting boundaries." When it comes to your food, training, and general lifestyle habits, you should have a certain line you won't cross. Ever.
The list can be as big or as small as you need to suit your own needs, but thing of these boundaries as the cornerstones of your personal philosophy of living. Make these boundaries personal- they don't have to make sense to anyone else but you.
For example, one of the "lines I won't cross" is eating in bed. It's just something I don't do. Eating and sleeping are separate activities in my mind, and I just personally find it slovenly to eat in bed. Now that might not have any meaning for you, so come up with your own boundaries- basically, your own personal "rules" of behavior.
Then, Have Fun!
One nice aspect of having your boundaries is that you know when you're inside of them, and also when you're outside of them. For me, I eat whatever I want on Christmas day and also on New Year's day. On those 2 days, I can totally enjoy myself food-wise because on all the other days, I followed the rules. If you don't have this type of structure, you're always living in a guilt-laden "no man's land."
Letting loose is just as important as discipline by the way- without one side of the coin, you can't have the other. Having a day where you eat whatever you want helps you to relax and recharge. So go eat a doughnut- right now. I'll take it as a sign that you understood the message I'm trying to get across in this article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About The Author
Charles Staley...world-class strength/performance coach...his colleagues call him an iconoclast, a visionary, a rule-breaker. His clients call him “The Secret Weapon” for his ability to see what other coaches miss. Charles calls himself a “geek” who struggled in Phys Ed throughout school. Whatever you call him, Charles’ methods are ahead of their time and quickly produce serious results.
Click here to visit Charles' site and grab your 5 FREE videos that will show you how to literally FORCE your body to build muscle, lose fat and gain strength with "Escalating Density Training," Charles' revolutionary, time-saving approach to lifting that focuses on performance NOT pain.
http://www.staleytrainingprograms.com
Director, Staley Training Systems
http://www.staleytraining.com
Getting through the winter holiday season without gaining 10-15 pounds never seemed like much of an issue to me personally, but based on all the questions I've been fielding about it lately, I thought I'd share my own thoughts on effectively handling the period of time stretching roughly from December 24th to January 1st.
First, Keep Things In Perspective
We're only talking about 9 days here, max. So even thought I hate doing thermodynamic "worst case" hypotheticals, remember that if you ate 3500 calories in excess of your metabolic requirements each of those 9 days, you'd only gain 9 pounds.
Now, I gotcha- no one wants to gain 9 pounds over the holidays, but look how much work it'd take to do that: if your daily caloric requirement is 2500 calories, you'd have to eat 6000 calories a day, every day for the entire 9 days to gain 9 pounds of fat! Using a less extreme and slightly more likely scenario, gaining 5 pounds over the holidays would require eating about 4500 calories a day for 9 days. That's a lot, don't you agree?
Having Your Cake And Eating It Too
Most people have time off from work over the holidays, which theoretically should open up some time and energy to get in some extra-productive training- that's for starters. Yeah, you'll have family in town, you'll have parties to attend, but the point remains. So there shouldn't really be any reason to become totally sedentary for 9 days.
Given that, why not plan a handful of strategic eating opportunities, enjoy the experience, and leave the guilt-trip for your in-laws? For example, why not completely gorge yourself on Christmas Eve and Christmas day, and likewise on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day? That's 4 days total.
If you ate an additional 3500 calories on each of those 4 days, you might potentially gain 4 pounds. But- and this is a significant point- that's a lot of extra eating. Even if you ate yourself silly on those 4 days, you're unlikely to reach the 14,000-calorie surplus necessary to gain 4 pounds.
Draw A Line In The Sand- Somewhere.
Now in case you're thinking I live in a cave somewhere and don't really understand that the average American starts the "holidays" a few days before Thanksgiving and ends them in mid-January, believe me, I get it. So if you're one of those people, let me suggest a neat little self-help tactic that I really like. It's called "setting boundaries." When it comes to your food, training, and general lifestyle habits, you should have a certain line you won't cross. Ever.
The list can be as big or as small as you need to suit your own needs, but thing of these boundaries as the cornerstones of your personal philosophy of living. Make these boundaries personal- they don't have to make sense to anyone else but you.
For example, one of the "lines I won't cross" is eating in bed. It's just something I don't do. Eating and sleeping are separate activities in my mind, and I just personally find it slovenly to eat in bed. Now that might not have any meaning for you, so come up with your own boundaries- basically, your own personal "rules" of behavior.
Then, Have Fun!
One nice aspect of having your boundaries is that you know when you're inside of them, and also when you're outside of them. For me, I eat whatever I want on Christmas day and also on New Year's day. On those 2 days, I can totally enjoy myself food-wise because on all the other days, I followed the rules. If you don't have this type of structure, you're always living in a guilt-laden "no man's land."
Letting loose is just as important as discipline by the way- without one side of the coin, you can't have the other. Having a day where you eat whatever you want helps you to relax and recharge. So go eat a doughnut- right now. I'll take it as a sign that you understood the message I'm trying to get across in this article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About The Author
Charles Staley...world-class strength/performance coach...his colleagues call him an iconoclast, a visionary, a rule-breaker. His clients call him “The Secret Weapon” for his ability to see what other coaches miss. Charles calls himself a “geek” who struggled in Phys Ed throughout school. Whatever you call him, Charles’ methods are ahead of their time and quickly produce serious results.
Click here to visit Charles' site and grab your 5 FREE videos that will show you how to literally FORCE your body to build muscle, lose fat and gain strength with "Escalating Density Training," Charles' revolutionary, time-saving approach to lifting that focuses on performance NOT pain.
http://www.staleytrainingprograms.com
Saturday, November 7, 2009
The All-Out 100% “Drive To The Wall”
Why The All-Out 100% “Drive To The Wall”
Is Necessary
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
We have sometimes been questioned regarding our philosophy of always attacking 100% and going "all out" in the face of a sudden, violent attack. "Why," some people have wanted to know, "do we not at first attempt to stop an attacker with a low level of force, and escalate to something more severe only if and when absolutely necessary, and only because the attack proves to be potentially deadly?"
Our answer is, “For the same reason that it is recognized as sheer idiocy to fire 'warning shots' with a firearm, when one is attacked in a manner that justifies the use of a sidearm — and/or — for the same reason that one does not try to 'shoot a gunman's weapon out of his hand', instead of shooting into that gunman‟s kill-zone, when under lethal attack”: UNDERTAKING SUCH ACTION WHEN ONE IS UNDER ATTACK IS SIMPLY TOO DANGEROUS TO RISK TRYING, AND, JUST AS PERTAINS TO THE NOTION OF “SHOOTING A GUN OUT OF AN ARMED MAN’S HAND”, IT IS ALL BUT IMPOSSIBLE TO ATTEMPT ACROBATIC NONSENSE SUCH AS THE APPLICATION OF “ARRESTING CONTROL” IN THE FACE OF A REAL ATTACK.
People who have not studied, researched, or been involved in real violence often have ideas regarding how violence may be handled put into their heads via motion picture and television shows. They then wonder why — in the real world — such methods as they see successfully rendered on the silver screen are not undertaken in actual confrontations. But in the real world violence is not a choreographed performance as it is on TV and in the movies. In the real world the good guy does not always win. Therefore, when good guys seek training in personal combat methods for self-protection they have a LOT to learn — not merely "technically", but tactically, mentally, and even emotionally, too.
When one is projected into a violent situation one has no possible way of knowing the intentions or the capabilities of one’s attacker(s). One must assume that one’s life is in peril, and one must do everything one possibly can RIGHT AWAY, WITHOUT ALLOWING THE SITUATION TO BECOME ANY MORE GRAVE THAN IT ALREADY HAS BECOME. The alternative to this is to attempt "lesser means", so as not to injure one’s attacker "too much".
But consider this: An attacker has chosen his course of action willfully. He knows what he wants to do, and he is demonstrating without question or doubt that he is willing to injure his intended victim. Only HE knows his ultimate objective. For all his intended victim can guess, it is the attacker’s purpose to murder him — and perhaps to murder the immediate victim;s loved ones, as well. How could anyone logically impose a responsibility to concern himself with ANYTHING save the immediate neutralization of the perceived threat?
And that is why we urge and advocate that which we do urge and advocate. We know that the victim of an attack has but one responsibility: To defend himself and his loved ones. He, the victim, did not ask for this predicament; the attacker has brought it on.The attacker is wholly responsible for whatever his victim does to him. There is not the slightest reason why the victim of any attack should care at all or concern himself in the least with the welfare of anyone who endangers his life ny violently attacking him.
This is "where we’re coming from".
No one in the world despises violence more than we do. We abhor physical aggression and regard as mindless savages those who choose violence in any instance, save that of DEFENSE. However, when defense is necessary — when it is MADE NECESSARY by some extralegal misfit — then we advocate the victim's instant and decisive counterattacking action; with NO regard for the opponent. It is simply too dangerous for anyone to bother with anything but the immediate application of decisive force when he is subjected to a violent attack. And in training and preparation for this contingency, we instruct anyone whose life is in imminent danger to attack ferociously and immediately, and to do so with utter disregard for the violent offender who has made this action necessary.
A victim who follows our teachings may still be injured or killed. That merely underscores the dire risk and danger of a physical attack. However, IF successfully defending himself is feasible, then a 100% drive to the wall — relentlessly attacking with ferocity and determination until the threat is neutralized — will certainly turn the trick for the intended victim.
Over the decades we have trained physicians, university professors, law enforcement officers, school teachers, businessmen, housewives, engineers, soldiers, private investigators, accountants, and virtually every type and variety of decent, respectable, peaceful human being in every vocation, occupation, and calling. Such fundamentally good people need to understand — to be taught to apply — attitudes, skills, and tactics that, were these people able to choose, would never have become necessary. And that’s the point. One IS NEVER “ABLE TO CHOOSE” TO AVOID A DETERMINED PHYSICAL ASSAILANT. ONE MUST DEAL WITH HIM. And the manner in which dealing with such a creature is best accomplished — proven in actual situations in both peacetime and during war — is by GOING AFTER HIM! The 100% committed "drive to the wall", all-out, the very second one realizes that one is in imminent danger, is the way to go. It WORKS.
If you’re ever in trouble, use it.
Is Necessary
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
We have sometimes been questioned regarding our philosophy of always attacking 100% and going "all out" in the face of a sudden, violent attack. "Why," some people have wanted to know, "do we not at first attempt to stop an attacker with a low level of force, and escalate to something more severe only if and when absolutely necessary, and only because the attack proves to be potentially deadly?"
Our answer is, “For the same reason that it is recognized as sheer idiocy to fire 'warning shots' with a firearm, when one is attacked in a manner that justifies the use of a sidearm — and/or — for the same reason that one does not try to 'shoot a gunman's weapon out of his hand', instead of shooting into that gunman‟s kill-zone, when under lethal attack”: UNDERTAKING SUCH ACTION WHEN ONE IS UNDER ATTACK IS SIMPLY TOO DANGEROUS TO RISK TRYING, AND, JUST AS PERTAINS TO THE NOTION OF “SHOOTING A GUN OUT OF AN ARMED MAN’S HAND”, IT IS ALL BUT IMPOSSIBLE TO ATTEMPT ACROBATIC NONSENSE SUCH AS THE APPLICATION OF “ARRESTING CONTROL” IN THE FACE OF A REAL ATTACK.
People who have not studied, researched, or been involved in real violence often have ideas regarding how violence may be handled put into their heads via motion picture and television shows. They then wonder why — in the real world — such methods as they see successfully rendered on the silver screen are not undertaken in actual confrontations. But in the real world violence is not a choreographed performance as it is on TV and in the movies. In the real world the good guy does not always win. Therefore, when good guys seek training in personal combat methods for self-protection they have a LOT to learn — not merely "technically", but tactically, mentally, and even emotionally, too.
When one is projected into a violent situation one has no possible way of knowing the intentions or the capabilities of one’s attacker(s). One must assume that one’s life is in peril, and one must do everything one possibly can RIGHT AWAY, WITHOUT ALLOWING THE SITUATION TO BECOME ANY MORE GRAVE THAN IT ALREADY HAS BECOME. The alternative to this is to attempt "lesser means", so as not to injure one’s attacker "too much".
But consider this: An attacker has chosen his course of action willfully. He knows what he wants to do, and he is demonstrating without question or doubt that he is willing to injure his intended victim. Only HE knows his ultimate objective. For all his intended victim can guess, it is the attacker’s purpose to murder him — and perhaps to murder the immediate victim;s loved ones, as well. How could anyone logically impose a responsibility to concern himself with ANYTHING save the immediate neutralization of the perceived threat?
And that is why we urge and advocate that which we do urge and advocate. We know that the victim of an attack has but one responsibility: To defend himself and his loved ones. He, the victim, did not ask for this predicament; the attacker has brought it on.The attacker is wholly responsible for whatever his victim does to him. There is not the slightest reason why the victim of any attack should care at all or concern himself in the least with the welfare of anyone who endangers his life ny violently attacking him.
This is "where we’re coming from".
No one in the world despises violence more than we do. We abhor physical aggression and regard as mindless savages those who choose violence in any instance, save that of DEFENSE. However, when defense is necessary — when it is MADE NECESSARY by some extralegal misfit — then we advocate the victim's instant and decisive counterattacking action; with NO regard for the opponent. It is simply too dangerous for anyone to bother with anything but the immediate application of decisive force when he is subjected to a violent attack. And in training and preparation for this contingency, we instruct anyone whose life is in imminent danger to attack ferociously and immediately, and to do so with utter disregard for the violent offender who has made this action necessary.
A victim who follows our teachings may still be injured or killed. That merely underscores the dire risk and danger of a physical attack. However, IF successfully defending himself is feasible, then a 100% drive to the wall — relentlessly attacking with ferocity and determination until the threat is neutralized — will certainly turn the trick for the intended victim.
Over the decades we have trained physicians, university professors, law enforcement officers, school teachers, businessmen, housewives, engineers, soldiers, private investigators, accountants, and virtually every type and variety of decent, respectable, peaceful human being in every vocation, occupation, and calling. Such fundamentally good people need to understand — to be taught to apply — attitudes, skills, and tactics that, were these people able to choose, would never have become necessary. And that’s the point. One IS NEVER “ABLE TO CHOOSE” TO AVOID A DETERMINED PHYSICAL ASSAILANT. ONE MUST DEAL WITH HIM. And the manner in which dealing with such a creature is best accomplished — proven in actual situations in both peacetime and during war — is by GOING AFTER HIM! The 100% committed "drive to the wall", all-out, the very second one realizes that one is in imminent danger, is the way to go. It WORKS.
If you’re ever in trouble, use it.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Defense Against Abduction
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
"Get in the car or I’ll blow your head off!"
"Come with me and I won’t hurt you; but I’ll use this knife if you resist!"
"Just come with us, and we won’t hurt you. But if you so as much as move the wrong way, we’ll kill you!"
"You can’t get away, so just come with me and don’t make a sound!"
It is difficult to imagine hearing more terrifying words than those above, spoken by one or more violent offenders whose clear intention is to effect your kidnapping. Only a genuine idiot would regard such a situation as being either non-frightening, or "easy to handle if you’re trained in the martial arts".
In fact, it is to prepare decent people to deal PRECISELY WITH THIS KIND OF HORRIFIC THREAT, and not to "win contests", or to "be a champion", that genuine combat training and quality self-defense instruction ought to be — and in the case of American Combato and similar systems — IS intended and directed.
But many would ask: “What could one possibly do in such an awful situation? Would it not prove futile — even suicidal — to attempt any resistance when confronted by this kind of threat?”
Without in the least denying the lethal nature of such an admittedly awful predicament, we must emphasize that by no means is resistance either "futile" or "impossible". In fact, we will not be surprised if we learn that many black belts would disagree with us, and that SUBMISSION and COMPLIANCE would be their (well-intended, but completely incorrect) advice, in the face of this kind of situation.
The truth is that the best (i.e. most likely to save the intended victim) reaction to an abduction attempt is the SURPRISE EMPLOYMENT OF WELL-EXECUTED DEADLY FORCE SKILLS BY THE INTENDED VICTIM. And, there’s a "right way" to do it — the rudiments of which we shall now explain.
Here, in a nutshell, is what you need to know about defending against abduction:
1. THE SITUATION IS NOT “HOPELESS.
2. YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR COOL
3. YOU NEED TO CONVEY A MISLEADING ATTITUDE
4. YOU NEED TO ABSOLUTELY KNOW AND FEEL THAT YOUR LIFE IS AT STAKE
5. YOU NEED LETHAL SKILLS AND — ABOVE ALL — THE UNHESITANT WILLINGNESS TO USE THEM WITHOUT RESTRAINT OR MERCY
6. YOU MUST NEVER PERMIT YOURSELF TO BE REMOVED FROM THE INITIAL SCENE OF CONFRONTATION WITH THE ABDUCTOR(S), AND YOU MUST NEVER ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE PLACED IN A PHYSICALLY HELPLESS POSITION
7. YOU MUST ACT AS SOON AS REALISTICALLY FEASIBLE ACCORDING TO YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION, AND IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE
8. THE VERY SECOND YOU HAVE CREATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO, YOU MUST ESCAPE THE SCENE AND GET AS FAR AWAY AS YOU CAN, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Killing a would-be criminal kidnapper is not merely "legal" — it is the proper thing to attempt to do, if you are able to do it, because it provides you with certain safety if successful, and, whether completely successful or not, it provides you with the surest means of getting away. Too many softies resist this "politically incorrect" idea today. The idea that, somehow, there is a "nice" or a "sanitized" way to defend against a lethal threat is a popular (and very stupid) misconception.
Face it: If you are confronting the threat of kidnap, then your LIFE is at stake.
Since kidnappers will not likely attempt their act when there is plenty of help around, and/or when you have a pretty decent avenue of escape open to you by running, you will be on your own. Remember, in this awful situation, that abductors do NOT wish to kill you at the moment of the abduction. For whatever reason they want to take you elsewhere, and to do so speedily, quietly, and without risk to themselves. Your opportunity for escape and survival is never going to be greater than it is AT THE SCENE OF THE ABDUCTION ATTEMPT — AND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Later on, after your kidnapper(s) has taken you away, your chances of surviving and escaping drop drastically, as you will be in a more secured environment (from the kidnapper’s perspective), you will be further away from any help, you will almost certainly be more mentally terrified and confused, and you’ll probably have undergone some physical ―softening up‖ (ie being BEATEN) by your abductor(s). You may, as captivity is prolonged, be deprived of adequate clothing, footwear, and nourishment. You may even be drugged. The message is: YOU MUST GET AWAY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
You cannot allow yourself to be tied up, handcuffed, shoved into a vehicle’s trunk, taken on board a vessel or aircraft, or otherwise placed in a position of total helplessness.
Should your kidnapper intend any of the above, PRETEND momentarily to be terrified and compliant, then ATTACK HIM WITH LETHAL INTENT AND DO NOT STOP ATTACKING UNTIL YOU HAVE ELIMINATED THE THREAT AND ARE ABLE TO ESCAPE.
If held at knife or gunpoint you must initially surrender. Convey fear and compliance. BUT THE VERY MOMENT YOU PERCEIVE THAT YOUR ABDUCTOR BELIEVES YOU ARE UNDER HIS CONTROL, KNOCK THE WEAPON ASIDE AND — IF YOU CAN — KILL HIM IMMEDIATELY.
Even if confronted by apparently unarmed abductors, whenever there is more than one, feign initial fear and compliance. This will normally prevent them from initiating what might be a knockout blow or overwhelming physical attack that you will be unable to repel immediately. WAIT. Let them believe that they’ve got you. Then ATTACK! Then get away.
In the unlikely event that you are confronted by a solitary and apparently unarmed abductor, make no initial telegraphing move, but without warning kick him in the testicles, chop him across the neck or throat, ram your fingers into his eyes and then break his leg with a side kick, etc. Then GET AWAY.
Remember that anyone — kidnapper or other lethal felon — who points a weapon at you and whose intention it is to cause you to comply with him, thereby, HAS PLACED HIMSELF ON THE DEFENSIVE. That means that the intended victim has the opportunity to select the moment when he will act, and the intended victim GETS TO MAKE THE FIRST MOVE!
Remember that it is not merely your life that an abductor is directly menacing, it is the life of every individual whom you love and who loves you. Remember that anyone dependent upon you will lose you if the abductor is successful. Remember, above all, that you must forthrightly, fully, and without the slightest tremor of hesitancy, PLAN ON KILLING AND INTEND TO KILL as effective preparatory training any individual or individuals who would forcibly kidnap you, or your reaction will be pathetically weak and ineffective, in a predicament that is already lethally serious and grave. This does not mean that in order to survive and escape you will inevitably have to kill your abductor. It means that initiating anything less than lethal force in your escape effort is foolish. Whether or not a kidnapper dies is irrelevant. By his action he has forfeited any right that he may have had to even the slightest mercy or consideration. SO DO NOT GIVE HIM ANY!
Thus far it has been our assumption that you will not be armed at the time of the kidnap attempt. Obviously, if you are armed, your weapon must be used as expertly and as unhesitantly as you are capable of using it. Remember that you may not be able to access a pistol or a knife quickly enough in an emergency, and you may well need to respond with unarmed force in order to gain the time and the distance needed to secure your weapon. DO NOT TRY TO “ARREST” YOUR ABDUCTOR(S). This will place you on the defensive, and you do not want to be thusly positioned. Just use that weapon to full effect, and do not hesitate or restrain yourself in the least. YOUR LIFE IS HANGING IN THE BALANCE!
There may be an object at hand with which you are able to assist yourself. If so, USE IT! Use it quickly, brutally, repeatedly, and without mercy, until you can safely escape.
The prospect for survival when or if kidnapped is frighteningly poor. On the other hand, the odds of successfully escaping BEFORE THE ABDUCTION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ACCOMPLISHED are considerable. In any case, it is always worth taking the chance, and taking action.
SPECIAL NOTE: We have, during the last several years, had the privilege of training a number of our Nation’s fighting men prior to their departure for the cesspool of the Middle East. We have invariably counseled these young men to NEVER FAIL to be armed with a readily accessible, razor-sharp fighting knife AND with a loaded, powerful handgun. Unfortunately we have had to say “To hell with the regulations!” when one or another of these men has advised us that such would not be permitted. the fact is, resisting an abduction attempt and dying while killing one’s abductors (a worse case scenario) beats ending up on the internet and being publicly beheaded by savages.
Our advice to those wonderful men who serve in the defense of our Country is the same. Whenever it is a matter of “survival versus compliance with rules” choose SURVIVAL!
Sword and Pen – November 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
"Get in the car or I’ll blow your head off!"
"Come with me and I won’t hurt you; but I’ll use this knife if you resist!"
"Just come with us, and we won’t hurt you. But if you so as much as move the wrong way, we’ll kill you!"
"You can’t get away, so just come with me and don’t make a sound!"
It is difficult to imagine hearing more terrifying words than those above, spoken by one or more violent offenders whose clear intention is to effect your kidnapping. Only a genuine idiot would regard such a situation as being either non-frightening, or "easy to handle if you’re trained in the martial arts".
In fact, it is to prepare decent people to deal PRECISELY WITH THIS KIND OF HORRIFIC THREAT, and not to "win contests", or to "be a champion", that genuine combat training and quality self-defense instruction ought to be — and in the case of American Combato and similar systems — IS intended and directed.
But many would ask: “What could one possibly do in such an awful situation? Would it not prove futile — even suicidal — to attempt any resistance when confronted by this kind of threat?”
Without in the least denying the lethal nature of such an admittedly awful predicament, we must emphasize that by no means is resistance either "futile" or "impossible". In fact, we will not be surprised if we learn that many black belts would disagree with us, and that SUBMISSION and COMPLIANCE would be their (well-intended, but completely incorrect) advice, in the face of this kind of situation.
The truth is that the best (i.e. most likely to save the intended victim) reaction to an abduction attempt is the SURPRISE EMPLOYMENT OF WELL-EXECUTED DEADLY FORCE SKILLS BY THE INTENDED VICTIM. And, there’s a "right way" to do it — the rudiments of which we shall now explain.
Here, in a nutshell, is what you need to know about defending against abduction:
1. THE SITUATION IS NOT “HOPELESS.
2. YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR COOL
3. YOU NEED TO CONVEY A MISLEADING ATTITUDE
4. YOU NEED TO ABSOLUTELY KNOW AND FEEL THAT YOUR LIFE IS AT STAKE
5. YOU NEED LETHAL SKILLS AND — ABOVE ALL — THE UNHESITANT WILLINGNESS TO USE THEM WITHOUT RESTRAINT OR MERCY
6. YOU MUST NEVER PERMIT YOURSELF TO BE REMOVED FROM THE INITIAL SCENE OF CONFRONTATION WITH THE ABDUCTOR(S), AND YOU MUST NEVER ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE PLACED IN A PHYSICALLY HELPLESS POSITION
7. YOU MUST ACT AS SOON AS REALISTICALLY FEASIBLE ACCORDING TO YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION, AND IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE
8. THE VERY SECOND YOU HAVE CREATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO, YOU MUST ESCAPE THE SCENE AND GET AS FAR AWAY AS YOU CAN, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Killing a would-be criminal kidnapper is not merely "legal" — it is the proper thing to attempt to do, if you are able to do it, because it provides you with certain safety if successful, and, whether completely successful or not, it provides you with the surest means of getting away. Too many softies resist this "politically incorrect" idea today. The idea that, somehow, there is a "nice" or a "sanitized" way to defend against a lethal threat is a popular (and very stupid) misconception.
Face it: If you are confronting the threat of kidnap, then your LIFE is at stake.
Since kidnappers will not likely attempt their act when there is plenty of help around, and/or when you have a pretty decent avenue of escape open to you by running, you will be on your own. Remember, in this awful situation, that abductors do NOT wish to kill you at the moment of the abduction. For whatever reason they want to take you elsewhere, and to do so speedily, quietly, and without risk to themselves. Your opportunity for escape and survival is never going to be greater than it is AT THE SCENE OF THE ABDUCTION ATTEMPT — AND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Later on, after your kidnapper(s) has taken you away, your chances of surviving and escaping drop drastically, as you will be in a more secured environment (from the kidnapper’s perspective), you will be further away from any help, you will almost certainly be more mentally terrified and confused, and you’ll probably have undergone some physical ―softening up‖ (ie being BEATEN) by your abductor(s). You may, as captivity is prolonged, be deprived of adequate clothing, footwear, and nourishment. You may even be drugged. The message is: YOU MUST GET AWAY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
You cannot allow yourself to be tied up, handcuffed, shoved into a vehicle’s trunk, taken on board a vessel or aircraft, or otherwise placed in a position of total helplessness.
Should your kidnapper intend any of the above, PRETEND momentarily to be terrified and compliant, then ATTACK HIM WITH LETHAL INTENT AND DO NOT STOP ATTACKING UNTIL YOU HAVE ELIMINATED THE THREAT AND ARE ABLE TO ESCAPE.
If held at knife or gunpoint you must initially surrender. Convey fear and compliance. BUT THE VERY MOMENT YOU PERCEIVE THAT YOUR ABDUCTOR BELIEVES YOU ARE UNDER HIS CONTROL, KNOCK THE WEAPON ASIDE AND — IF YOU CAN — KILL HIM IMMEDIATELY.
Even if confronted by apparently unarmed abductors, whenever there is more than one, feign initial fear and compliance. This will normally prevent them from initiating what might be a knockout blow or overwhelming physical attack that you will be unable to repel immediately. WAIT. Let them believe that they’ve got you. Then ATTACK! Then get away.
In the unlikely event that you are confronted by a solitary and apparently unarmed abductor, make no initial telegraphing move, but without warning kick him in the testicles, chop him across the neck or throat, ram your fingers into his eyes and then break his leg with a side kick, etc. Then GET AWAY.
Remember that anyone — kidnapper or other lethal felon — who points a weapon at you and whose intention it is to cause you to comply with him, thereby, HAS PLACED HIMSELF ON THE DEFENSIVE. That means that the intended victim has the opportunity to select the moment when he will act, and the intended victim GETS TO MAKE THE FIRST MOVE!
Remember that it is not merely your life that an abductor is directly menacing, it is the life of every individual whom you love and who loves you. Remember that anyone dependent upon you will lose you if the abductor is successful. Remember, above all, that you must forthrightly, fully, and without the slightest tremor of hesitancy, PLAN ON KILLING AND INTEND TO KILL as effective preparatory training any individual or individuals who would forcibly kidnap you, or your reaction will be pathetically weak and ineffective, in a predicament that is already lethally serious and grave. This does not mean that in order to survive and escape you will inevitably have to kill your abductor. It means that initiating anything less than lethal force in your escape effort is foolish. Whether or not a kidnapper dies is irrelevant. By his action he has forfeited any right that he may have had to even the slightest mercy or consideration. SO DO NOT GIVE HIM ANY!
Thus far it has been our assumption that you will not be armed at the time of the kidnap attempt. Obviously, if you are armed, your weapon must be used as expertly and as unhesitantly as you are capable of using it. Remember that you may not be able to access a pistol or a knife quickly enough in an emergency, and you may well need to respond with unarmed force in order to gain the time and the distance needed to secure your weapon. DO NOT TRY TO “ARREST” YOUR ABDUCTOR(S). This will place you on the defensive, and you do not want to be thusly positioned. Just use that weapon to full effect, and do not hesitate or restrain yourself in the least. YOUR LIFE IS HANGING IN THE BALANCE!
There may be an object at hand with which you are able to assist yourself. If so, USE IT! Use it quickly, brutally, repeatedly, and without mercy, until you can safely escape.
The prospect for survival when or if kidnapped is frighteningly poor. On the other hand, the odds of successfully escaping BEFORE THE ABDUCTION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ACCOMPLISHED are considerable. In any case, it is always worth taking the chance, and taking action.
SPECIAL NOTE: We have, during the last several years, had the privilege of training a number of our Nation’s fighting men prior to their departure for the cesspool of the Middle East. We have invariably counseled these young men to NEVER FAIL to be armed with a readily accessible, razor-sharp fighting knife AND with a loaded, powerful handgun. Unfortunately we have had to say “To hell with the regulations!” when one or another of these men has advised us that such would not be permitted. the fact is, resisting an abduction attempt and dying while killing one’s abductors (a worse case scenario) beats ending up on the internet and being publicly beheaded by savages.
Our advice to those wonderful men who serve in the defense of our Country is the same. Whenever it is a matter of “survival versus compliance with rules” choose SURVIVAL!
Monday, October 19, 2009
LEO Tribe Mentality
[References for the original story of the Tony Arambula shooting by Phoenix PD]
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER — ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
MOST of those who subscribe to CQ are doubtless aware of the recent catastrophic event that occurred in Phoenix, Arizona, when a police officer shot a homeowner six times in error, when responding to that very homeowner’s — and his wife’s — emergency call to 911. The homeowner had subdued and was restraining at gunpoint a home invader. the dispatcher had so advised, and, upon the officers’ arrival on the scene, the wife told the police that “the man inside with the gun is my husband — he’s holding the housebreaker on the ground.” The officers proceeded with entry, and one of them opened fire immediately on the homeowner, shooting him six times and — miraculously — not killing him, according to the news report that we heard.
When we first saw the video on the internet (CNN News) in which the wife of the shooting victim and her attorney appeared, reiterating what had occurred and — understandably — in which the wife virtually broke down, we were livid, outraged, and incensed. As is our habit, we e-mailed our commentary regarding the incident to those on our contact list with whom we strive to remain in regular touch. We also referred our contacts to the CNN posted video of what we had seen, with the request that they watch it for themselves.
One of our contacts was a seasoned NYPD Officer (Emergency Services Division, as we understand) with whom we had been in previous contact (a contact originally initiated by him), with whom we had had an extensive conversation regarding our methods of close combat and self-defense, and who had, in addition to his law enforcement experience, a military service (Special Forces, according to him) background. Subsequent to our conversation we replied to an inquiry he had made asking for our input regarding certain close combat actions and responses. The two of us had, we thought at the time, a pretty good rapport.
In response to our e-mail of outrage concerning the unjustifiable shooting of the private citizen by the Phoenix police officer we received an aggressive, angry, severely critical e-mail from this NYPD Officer. It began with the demand that we remove him from our contact list, and went on to express his livid, outraged, incensed reaction to us and to our position regarding the Phoenix shooting. There was not even a word of concern, compassion, or care for the shooting victim; and there was not even a slight degree of acknowledgement that the disgraceful (and frankly terrifying) incident was the responsibility of those charged with “serving and protecting”. All that this Officer could see, hear, feel, or comprehend was that we were not blindly supporting or excusing the Phoenix police officer. We were “being critical of cops”. (And you’re goddamned right we ARE critical — justifiably critical, according to any rational standard! — when anything of this nature occurs. We do not have an overweaning respect for police, soldiers, bookkeepers, doctors, truck drivers, butchers, bakers, or candlestick makers, or anyone else.) When the wrong thing is done, those who have done it should be acknowledged to have done wrong, and should be held accountable for their behavior!
We could not help but think (as we deleted this individual’s e-mail address and name from our contact list, and wrote him off as “one among many” of those with whom circumstances have proven to be a meaningless individual with whom to continue to relate) HOW THIS OFFICER WOULD HAVE REACTED IF THIS SITUATION HAPPENED TO HIM AND TO HIS WIFE, AT HIS HOME.
While pointing it out to him would have only resulted in denial and — likely — increased and renewed rage, what this Officer was demonstrating via his attitude was a TRIBAL mentality. His “tribe” was threatened. His loyalty is to his “tribe”. It is them or it is us according to this primitive, uncivilized, dangerous form of VERY UNAMERICAN “thinking”.
AND THIS IS HOW MANY PEOPLE “THINK” TODAY.
A reasonable human being is loyal first and foremost to principles. When a man becomes a law enforcement officer in a free and open society he is loyal to the PRINCIPLE that all persons’ rights must be respected as sacred, and that it is his solemn responsibility to PROTECT and to SERVE the private citizenry of that society. He is sworn to this concept (as a “sworn” officer), and he must never knowingly or intentionally violate the rights of any private citizen. Nor must he permit anyone else to do so; EVEN IF THAT “SOMEONE ELSE” IS ALSO A POLICE OFFICER!
Few types of people are as potentially dangerous to the safety, well-being, and life of the private citizen, than the kind of persons who regard themselves and their fellow police officers as being “brothers” — amongst whom and within whose tribe, all swear and uphold an allegiance to each other, rather than to the purpose of serving and protecting the citizenry. Sadly, this appears to be the state of affairs with all too many police officers today in our Country.
The cop who refuses to give a ticket to a “brother officer” is a disgrace.
The cop who covers up for a “brother officer” who has perpetrated misconduct is a disgrace.
The cop who uses steroids to assist himself in building his body — but who arrests others who use steroids — is a disgrace.
The cop who participates in an effort to disarm the private citizen is a disgrace.
The cop who employs unnecessary degrees of force against a suspect is a disgrace.
The cop who drives, parks, or otherwise manages control of his vehicle in any manner for which he would stop and ticket a private citizen (except, of course, during the course of official , legitimate law enforcing, when such driving or vehicle management is necessary and justifiable) is a disgrace.
Nothing destroys citizen confidence in and respect for the police more than obvious misconduct by police THAT GOES UNACKNOWLEDGED AND UNPUNISHED because such misconduct was done by police, and thus “brother officers” turn a blind eye toward the misdeed and toward “one of their own”.
In today’s decaying and decrepit society we observe all sorts of expressions of this “tribal” mentality. But in no other — save perhaps the military and the intelligence communities, as well — besides law enforcement and police work, is the negative and horrific effect upon the decent, innocent private citizen felt so bitterly, painfully, and acutely.
And, as history has shown, sooner or later, people fight back.
There is a crucial lesson to be learned from observing our experience with this police officer, and in noting the tone and style of his outrage. Instead of being supremely loyal to the principles which he presumably had been sworn to uphold and to protect, his loyalty is to PEOPLE. Specifically, it is to those people who are part of his particular “club” (or “gang”, or “tribe”); i.e OTHER COPS.
This kind of tribal thinking may be seen in other venues today. For example: black people who automatically defend any black person in any conflict where the opposition happens to be white. Or the reverse: whites who automatically defend other whites when a conflict happens to be between parties of different ethnicities. Women who assume that if any woman has any disagreement or conflict with any man, then the man involved must automatically be wrong. Etcetera.
This kind of primitive, tribal LUNACY and lack of basic CIVILIZATION is indicative of the crumbling of Western Civilization, per se. It is at once frustrating, alarming, disgusting, and dangerous. Give the matter a few minutes serious thought and, if you’re intelligent enough to appreciate CQ and that which this Publication stands for, espouses, and presents, you ought to be able easily to see why.
/////////////////////////////E N D /////////////////////////////////////
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER — ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
MOST of those who subscribe to CQ are doubtless aware of the recent catastrophic event that occurred in Phoenix, Arizona, when a police officer shot a homeowner six times in error, when responding to that very homeowner’s — and his wife’s — emergency call to 911. The homeowner had subdued and was restraining at gunpoint a home invader. the dispatcher had so advised, and, upon the officers’ arrival on the scene, the wife told the police that “the man inside with the gun is my husband — he’s holding the housebreaker on the ground.” The officers proceeded with entry, and one of them opened fire immediately on the homeowner, shooting him six times and — miraculously — not killing him, according to the news report that we heard.
When we first saw the video on the internet (CNN News) in which the wife of the shooting victim and her attorney appeared, reiterating what had occurred and — understandably — in which the wife virtually broke down, we were livid, outraged, and incensed. As is our habit, we e-mailed our commentary regarding the incident to those on our contact list with whom we strive to remain in regular touch. We also referred our contacts to the CNN posted video of what we had seen, with the request that they watch it for themselves.
One of our contacts was a seasoned NYPD Officer (Emergency Services Division, as we understand) with whom we had been in previous contact (a contact originally initiated by him), with whom we had had an extensive conversation regarding our methods of close combat and self-defense, and who had, in addition to his law enforcement experience, a military service (Special Forces, according to him) background. Subsequent to our conversation we replied to an inquiry he had made asking for our input regarding certain close combat actions and responses. The two of us had, we thought at the time, a pretty good rapport.
In response to our e-mail of outrage concerning the unjustifiable shooting of the private citizen by the Phoenix police officer we received an aggressive, angry, severely critical e-mail from this NYPD Officer. It began with the demand that we remove him from our contact list, and went on to express his livid, outraged, incensed reaction to us and to our position regarding the Phoenix shooting. There was not even a word of concern, compassion, or care for the shooting victim; and there was not even a slight degree of acknowledgement that the disgraceful (and frankly terrifying) incident was the responsibility of those charged with “serving and protecting”. All that this Officer could see, hear, feel, or comprehend was that we were not blindly supporting or excusing the Phoenix police officer. We were “being critical of cops”. (And you’re goddamned right we ARE critical — justifiably critical, according to any rational standard! — when anything of this nature occurs. We do not have an overweaning respect for police, soldiers, bookkeepers, doctors, truck drivers, butchers, bakers, or candlestick makers, or anyone else.) When the wrong thing is done, those who have done it should be acknowledged to have done wrong, and should be held accountable for their behavior!
We could not help but think (as we deleted this individual’s e-mail address and name from our contact list, and wrote him off as “one among many” of those with whom circumstances have proven to be a meaningless individual with whom to continue to relate) HOW THIS OFFICER WOULD HAVE REACTED IF THIS SITUATION HAPPENED TO HIM AND TO HIS WIFE, AT HIS HOME.
While pointing it out to him would have only resulted in denial and — likely — increased and renewed rage, what this Officer was demonstrating via his attitude was a TRIBAL mentality. His “tribe” was threatened. His loyalty is to his “tribe”. It is them or it is us according to this primitive, uncivilized, dangerous form of VERY UNAMERICAN “thinking”.
AND THIS IS HOW MANY PEOPLE “THINK” TODAY.
A reasonable human being is loyal first and foremost to principles. When a man becomes a law enforcement officer in a free and open society he is loyal to the PRINCIPLE that all persons’ rights must be respected as sacred, and that it is his solemn responsibility to PROTECT and to SERVE the private citizenry of that society. He is sworn to this concept (as a “sworn” officer), and he must never knowingly or intentionally violate the rights of any private citizen. Nor must he permit anyone else to do so; EVEN IF THAT “SOMEONE ELSE” IS ALSO A POLICE OFFICER!
Few types of people are as potentially dangerous to the safety, well-being, and life of the private citizen, than the kind of persons who regard themselves and their fellow police officers as being “brothers” — amongst whom and within whose tribe, all swear and uphold an allegiance to each other, rather than to the purpose of serving and protecting the citizenry. Sadly, this appears to be the state of affairs with all too many police officers today in our Country.
The cop who refuses to give a ticket to a “brother officer” is a disgrace.
The cop who covers up for a “brother officer” who has perpetrated misconduct is a disgrace.
The cop who uses steroids to assist himself in building his body — but who arrests others who use steroids — is a disgrace.
The cop who participates in an effort to disarm the private citizen is a disgrace.
The cop who employs unnecessary degrees of force against a suspect is a disgrace.
The cop who drives, parks, or otherwise manages control of his vehicle in any manner for which he would stop and ticket a private citizen (except, of course, during the course of official , legitimate law enforcing, when such driving or vehicle management is necessary and justifiable) is a disgrace.
Nothing destroys citizen confidence in and respect for the police more than obvious misconduct by police THAT GOES UNACKNOWLEDGED AND UNPUNISHED because such misconduct was done by police, and thus “brother officers” turn a blind eye toward the misdeed and toward “one of their own”.
In today’s decaying and decrepit society we observe all sorts of expressions of this “tribal” mentality. But in no other — save perhaps the military and the intelligence communities, as well — besides law enforcement and police work, is the negative and horrific effect upon the decent, innocent private citizen felt so bitterly, painfully, and acutely.
And, as history has shown, sooner or later, people fight back.
There is a crucial lesson to be learned from observing our experience with this police officer, and in noting the tone and style of his outrage. Instead of being supremely loyal to the principles which he presumably had been sworn to uphold and to protect, his loyalty is to PEOPLE. Specifically, it is to those people who are part of his particular “club” (or “gang”, or “tribe”); i.e OTHER COPS.
This kind of tribal thinking may be seen in other venues today. For example: black people who automatically defend any black person in any conflict where the opposition happens to be white. Or the reverse: whites who automatically defend other whites when a conflict happens to be between parties of different ethnicities. Women who assume that if any woman has any disagreement or conflict with any man, then the man involved must automatically be wrong. Etcetera.
This kind of primitive, tribal LUNACY and lack of basic CIVILIZATION is indicative of the crumbling of Western Civilization, per se. It is at once frustrating, alarming, disgusting, and dangerous. Give the matter a few minutes serious thought and, if you’re intelligent enough to appreciate CQ and that which this Publication stands for, espouses, and presents, you ought to be able easily to see why.
/////////////////////////////E N D /////////////////////////////////////
Saturday, October 17, 2009
The Value Of Blows To The Head
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
WHILE it is no secret that clenched fist punching to the bony facial and head area will often result in more serious injuries to the one who delivers such punches than they inflict upon the recipient, the student of close combat must understand that not only are blows to the head critically important in real hand-to-hand engagements, but also that there are powerful and reliable methods of delivering such blows that — although banned in competition — are pure gold for emergency application when one is playing marbles "for keeps"!
Blows to the head are potentially very dangerous. They are also INSTANTLY DECISIVE, which makes them outstanding techniques to employ in an emergency. When the head is struck powerfully there is extreme shock to the brain. And if the head is struck ferociously in one direction and then in the opposite direction the result will almost invariably be a KNOCKOUT, since concussion is the likely outcome. The knockout results from tissue being torn inside the head as the brain is shaken violently within the skull from the successive hits. This accounts for the famous "one two" knockout sequence so often referred to in boxing: A left jab is snapped smartly into the opponent's face, and then a powerful straight right completes the job!The only problem with this excellent sequence is that it is a boxing sequence. The clenched fists sans gloves are not good for striking blows to the head (as stated earlier) outside the ring.
Besides, it can take six to eight months for a novice to train to the point where he can reasonably expect to deliver sufficiently accurate and forceful clenched fist punches to effect a reliable "one-two" sequence.
NOT SO with the following blows:—
• Edge of the hand
• Heel of the hand
• Hammerfist smash
• Elbow smash
• Head butt
Those blows — normally banned (and quite properly so!) from full contact application to the facial/head area in sporting contests, are perfect for employment against a violent attacker, when the "prize" is SURVIVAL.
No one struck viciously and solidly with any one of those five blows will fail to be at the very least disoriented long enough for a second blow — executed with the same or with one of the other natural weapons — that smashes his head powerfully in the opposite direction of the original blow. Here are some suggested combinations to work on:—
a) Snap a speedy leading edge-of-the-hand blow to the opponent's face, then drive your body forward as the chopping hand returns and smash a forward elbow blow across the opponent's temple.
b) Leading hand delivers an edge-of-the-hand blow, then step in and drive a chinjab smash (heel-of-the-hand blow) upward under the opponent's jaw with your rearmost hand.
c) Chinjab smash rapidly — alternating hands — driving two blows, one into each side of the opponent's head, in rapid succession.
d) Execute a sharp, untelegraphed vertical hammerfist smash to the opponent's temple or jaw hinge area with your rearmost hand. Followup instantly after impact by slamming a lead arm elbow smash into the opponent's head.
e) Head butt your opponent smartly as he moves in close to you (or you to him), then drive a hooking heel of the hand blow using your foremost hand into his temple or jaw hinge.
f) Deliver a chinjab smash using your rearmost hand to the opponent's jaw, then followup with a lead arm elbow smash across the opponent's temple or jaw hinge.
CAUTION!: The foregoing sequences are extremely dangerous and can result in serious injury. They are NOT to be practiced with contact to a live training partner, and they are NEVER to be used against anyone, except in a case where self-defense action is unavoidable in order to prevent grievous injury from an attacker. Work the blows in the air, on dummies, on a heavy bag, or on some other striking apparatus.
When you train, observe the following points:
• Always launch your attacks by surprise. Make no "cocking" or other telegraphing movements — just HIT!
• Get your entire body into the blows by utilizing waist-hip turn and driving forward into the attack.
• Although the sequence will almost certainly drop your man if successful, be prepared to followup relentlessly — just in case.
• Give lots of thought to all of the situations in which the sequences may be applied.
• Develop other sequences, according to your inclinations, experiences, and personal preferences.
• Become a "HEADHUNTER"! Go after your attacker's head with powerful barrages of successive unarmed combat strikes whenever you are in danger, and attacking in this manner appears to be suited to the situation!
• Never forget that the purpose of these specific combinations is to JAR and SNAP the opponent's head viciously in one direction and then suddenly in another — with the aim of causing concussion.
REREAD THE "CAUTION" AND PAY ATTENTION TO ITS MESSAGE! We do not assume any responsibility for your use or misuse of this or any other information imparted here or elsewhere. Be a responsible, law-abiding, non-troublesome and peaceful person. Use these types of actions ONLY in legitimate self-defense!
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
WHILE it is no secret that clenched fist punching to the bony facial and head area will often result in more serious injuries to the one who delivers such punches than they inflict upon the recipient, the student of close combat must understand that not only are blows to the head critically important in real hand-to-hand engagements, but also that there are powerful and reliable methods of delivering such blows that — although banned in competition — are pure gold for emergency application when one is playing marbles "for keeps"!
Blows to the head are potentially very dangerous. They are also INSTANTLY DECISIVE, which makes them outstanding techniques to employ in an emergency. When the head is struck powerfully there is extreme shock to the brain. And if the head is struck ferociously in one direction and then in the opposite direction the result will almost invariably be a KNOCKOUT, since concussion is the likely outcome. The knockout results from tissue being torn inside the head as the brain is shaken violently within the skull from the successive hits. This accounts for the famous "one two" knockout sequence so often referred to in boxing: A left jab is snapped smartly into the opponent's face, and then a powerful straight right completes the job!The only problem with this excellent sequence is that it is a boxing sequence. The clenched fists sans gloves are not good for striking blows to the head (as stated earlier) outside the ring.
Besides, it can take six to eight months for a novice to train to the point where he can reasonably expect to deliver sufficiently accurate and forceful clenched fist punches to effect a reliable "one-two" sequence.
NOT SO with the following blows:—
• Edge of the hand
• Heel of the hand
• Hammerfist smash
• Elbow smash
• Head butt
Those blows — normally banned (and quite properly so!) from full contact application to the facial/head area in sporting contests, are perfect for employment against a violent attacker, when the "prize" is SURVIVAL.
No one struck viciously and solidly with any one of those five blows will fail to be at the very least disoriented long enough for a second blow — executed with the same or with one of the other natural weapons — that smashes his head powerfully in the opposite direction of the original blow. Here are some suggested combinations to work on:—
a) Snap a speedy leading edge-of-the-hand blow to the opponent's face, then drive your body forward as the chopping hand returns and smash a forward elbow blow across the opponent's temple.
b) Leading hand delivers an edge-of-the-hand blow, then step in and drive a chinjab smash (heel-of-the-hand blow) upward under the opponent's jaw with your rearmost hand.
c) Chinjab smash rapidly — alternating hands — driving two blows, one into each side of the opponent's head, in rapid succession.
d) Execute a sharp, untelegraphed vertical hammerfist smash to the opponent's temple or jaw hinge area with your rearmost hand. Followup instantly after impact by slamming a lead arm elbow smash into the opponent's head.
e) Head butt your opponent smartly as he moves in close to you (or you to him), then drive a hooking heel of the hand blow using your foremost hand into his temple or jaw hinge.
f) Deliver a chinjab smash using your rearmost hand to the opponent's jaw, then followup with a lead arm elbow smash across the opponent's temple or jaw hinge.
CAUTION!: The foregoing sequences are extremely dangerous and can result in serious injury. They are NOT to be practiced with contact to a live training partner, and they are NEVER to be used against anyone, except in a case where self-defense action is unavoidable in order to prevent grievous injury from an attacker. Work the blows in the air, on dummies, on a heavy bag, or on some other striking apparatus.
When you train, observe the following points:
• Always launch your attacks by surprise. Make no "cocking" or other telegraphing movements — just HIT!
• Get your entire body into the blows by utilizing waist-hip turn and driving forward into the attack.
• Although the sequence will almost certainly drop your man if successful, be prepared to followup relentlessly — just in case.
• Give lots of thought to all of the situations in which the sequences may be applied.
• Develop other sequences, according to your inclinations, experiences, and personal preferences.
• Become a "HEADHUNTER"! Go after your attacker's head with powerful barrages of successive unarmed combat strikes whenever you are in danger, and attacking in this manner appears to be suited to the situation!
• Never forget that the purpose of these specific combinations is to JAR and SNAP the opponent's head viciously in one direction and then suddenly in another — with the aim of causing concussion.
REREAD THE "CAUTION" AND PAY ATTENTION TO ITS MESSAGE! We do not assume any responsibility for your use or misuse of this or any other information imparted here or elsewhere. Be a responsible, law-abiding, non-troublesome and peaceful person. Use these types of actions ONLY in legitimate self-defense!
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Yaye! Let the job hunt begin!
Sheesh!
Without another extension, my contract will expire about the same time I return from Vacation. (I'm tempted to cancel my vacation becausse of this... )
My rep has been e-mailing the manager for the last month or so asking about their intent. Do they wish to extend my contract? No response. We see this a lot around here; partly because people are so busy with product and team org issues, partly because of the inefficiency of the Exchange servers and peoples e-mail service dropping off of the face off the earth.
So it may be that I come back from work and have no job: cannot even get into the bulding and will possibly lose my work e-mail access before I find out whether or not I've been extended.
This doesn't really make sense because we just got an assload of tests dumped on us and barely have enough people to run them weekly as it is. We're automatically losing one more tester next month because his one-year term will be up. Then we lose another after that if she doesn't get extended. She wass hired a month or so after I was. So the entire team is disappearing one at a time.
This drops a urine soaked rag on my vacation plans. Even if I were to go anywhere I'd be completely preoccupied with the future, the fate of my job here. I may end up conducting a job search while I'm out next week. I'm probably not going to be spending any money.
It pretty much sucks! I'd like to hear one way or another... and that's what worries me. In the past, with other employees, there have been times when it was "Today's your last day." I think that's BS. If it were an issue where someone was a suspect employee then I could understand it. When it's semi-policy it's bogus.
This comes right at a time when I'm shelling out around $500 to start up in Combato again... and trying to get the savings account back up to $3500 so I can submit my applicatin to CASS for EP training next year. BOGUS I SAY!!!
Without another extension, my contract will expire about the same time I return from Vacation. (I'm tempted to cancel my vacation becausse of this... )
My rep has been e-mailing the manager for the last month or so asking about their intent. Do they wish to extend my contract? No response. We see this a lot around here; partly because people are so busy with product and team org issues, partly because of the inefficiency of the Exchange servers and peoples e-mail service dropping off of the face off the earth.
So it may be that I come back from work and have no job: cannot even get into the bulding and will possibly lose my work e-mail access before I find out whether or not I've been extended.
This doesn't really make sense because we just got an assload of tests dumped on us and barely have enough people to run them weekly as it is. We're automatically losing one more tester next month because his one-year term will be up. Then we lose another after that if she doesn't get extended. She wass hired a month or so after I was. So the entire team is disappearing one at a time.
This drops a urine soaked rag on my vacation plans. Even if I were to go anywhere I'd be completely preoccupied with the future, the fate of my job here. I may end up conducting a job search while I'm out next week. I'm probably not going to be spending any money.
It pretty much sucks! I'd like to hear one way or another... and that's what worries me. In the past, with other employees, there have been times when it was "Today's your last day." I think that's BS. If it were an issue where someone was a suspect employee then I could understand it. When it's semi-policy it's bogus.
This comes right at a time when I'm shelling out around $500 to start up in Combato again... and trying to get the savings account back up to $3500 so I can submit my applicatin to CASS for EP training next year. BOGUS I SAY!!!
Proper Protective Distancing
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – October 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Correct distancing is a matter that is always addressed in the classical/traditional martial arts. Unfortunately, actual practice of this aspect of dealing with an adversary comes — in the classical/traditional approaches — from sparring and from competitive matches; both unrelated to close combat and/or the requirements of actual self-defense encounters. When you train to "square off" with an opponent, to "get set", to "ready yourself in a stance", etc., and to anticipate that your adversary will either strike or grapple in a conventional (or at least in a restricted and regulated) manner you are not duplicating the kind of DISTANCING TRAINING that the real world requires, should you need to actually defend yourself.
First of all, forget about "fighting stances". These are for agreed-upon matches (or mutual combat — neither one of which is related to that which a self-defense or close combat practitioner concerns himself with). In the real world you will either be AWARE of an attacker’s approach prior to his onslaught, or you will not be aware. If you aware, go to a ready position and if/when the first indication of aggression manifests, PREEMPT! If you are not aware, you’ll simply be reacting via the best counterattacking actions of which you are capable. (There is a third possibility for military and intelligence people: You may be ATTACKING THE OTHER GUY. If this is the case, then take him by surprise — if at all possible from behind — and finish the job. Do not walk up in front of him and get into some ridiculous stance!).
In any case, you will advance your development and readiness to deal with real violence from a troublemaker who makes his approach apparent, by applying the following INVIOLATE RULE:
Whenever you face anyone who you do not know, personally, off angle yourself (into a "relaxed-ready" position), and maintain a distance from that person that is no closer than OUTSIDE ARM’S LENGTH.
What the assumption of that distance does is insure that, when and if this unknown individual initiates an attack, he will need to step forward toward you in order to reach you. This make a genuine "surprise attack" from him (assuming that you are in an ALERT MENTAL STATE) virtually impossible. The most skilled individual in the world must still be able to reach you, before he can harm you. And the fact that you have distanced yourself outside the range of his reach insures that his FORWARD STEP will telegraph his intention.
Question: "Suppose the individual merely intends to step closer to me, and nothing more? Might I not be making a tragic error of judgment if I attacked him as he moved?"
Answer: Indeed, you would be making a terrible error by attacking a non-aggressive individual. However, doing so is easily avoided, and you ought never have such a problem. Just STEP BACK if the step toward you is apparently non aggressive. REESTABLISH the outside-arm’s-length distance. Politely say, "Sir, please step back," if you wish, as you yourself move. That gesture and statement is neither provocative nor offensive, and will do all that is necessary without incurring any possibility of "misapplied aggression". A person whose intention is not aggression will keep his distance.
By maintaining this out-of-reach distance you will enjoy another advantage, should the individual whom you face decide to attack you. His attack and your preemptive reaction will bring about a COLLISION EFFECT, and add whatever weight and momentum your attacker generates toward you, to whatever power and momentum your preemptive action directs toward him.
Violent offenders, generally speaking, will not attempt to attack if they do not feel that their onslaught will be effective, if they feel that they will be hurt, and if they have no assurance that they will be able to get away before the police arrive. Since the impression conveyed by a person who remains steadfastly distanced, alert, and not readily approachable is NOT that this person is susceptible to a surprise attack, assuming a proper off-angled ready position and holding to the right distance might discourage some attacks, to begin with. This of course is what we would most hope for, but we cannot expect it in all cases.
Correct understanding of the principle, and unwavering use of the strategy of employing PROPER DISTANCING will go a long way toward assisting you in both avoidance and in being prepared for preemption, should avoidance be impossible.
One final thing: Whenever you are approached by two or more individuals who you do not know personally, STEP TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE PAIR/GROUP and assume your relaxed ready position facing the closest person. Keep your distance relative to him, outside arm’s reach.
Sword and Pen – October 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Correct distancing is a matter that is always addressed in the classical/traditional martial arts. Unfortunately, actual practice of this aspect of dealing with an adversary comes — in the classical/traditional approaches — from sparring and from competitive matches; both unrelated to close combat and/or the requirements of actual self-defense encounters. When you train to "square off" with an opponent, to "get set", to "ready yourself in a stance", etc., and to anticipate that your adversary will either strike or grapple in a conventional (or at least in a restricted and regulated) manner you are not duplicating the kind of DISTANCING TRAINING that the real world requires, should you need to actually defend yourself.
First of all, forget about "fighting stances". These are for agreed-upon matches (or mutual combat — neither one of which is related to that which a self-defense or close combat practitioner concerns himself with). In the real world you will either be AWARE of an attacker’s approach prior to his onslaught, or you will not be aware. If you aware, go to a ready position and if/when the first indication of aggression manifests, PREEMPT! If you are not aware, you’ll simply be reacting via the best counterattacking actions of which you are capable. (There is a third possibility for military and intelligence people: You may be ATTACKING THE OTHER GUY. If this is the case, then take him by surprise — if at all possible from behind — and finish the job. Do not walk up in front of him and get into some ridiculous stance!).
In any case, you will advance your development and readiness to deal with real violence from a troublemaker who makes his approach apparent, by applying the following INVIOLATE RULE:
Whenever you face anyone who you do not know, personally, off angle yourself (into a "relaxed-ready" position), and maintain a distance from that person that is no closer than OUTSIDE ARM’S LENGTH.
What the assumption of that distance does is insure that, when and if this unknown individual initiates an attack, he will need to step forward toward you in order to reach you. This make a genuine "surprise attack" from him (assuming that you are in an ALERT MENTAL STATE) virtually impossible. The most skilled individual in the world must still be able to reach you, before he can harm you. And the fact that you have distanced yourself outside the range of his reach insures that his FORWARD STEP will telegraph his intention.
Question: "Suppose the individual merely intends to step closer to me, and nothing more? Might I not be making a tragic error of judgment if I attacked him as he moved?"
Answer: Indeed, you would be making a terrible error by attacking a non-aggressive individual. However, doing so is easily avoided, and you ought never have such a problem. Just STEP BACK if the step toward you is apparently non aggressive. REESTABLISH the outside-arm’s-length distance. Politely say, "Sir, please step back," if you wish, as you yourself move. That gesture and statement is neither provocative nor offensive, and will do all that is necessary without incurring any possibility of "misapplied aggression". A person whose intention is not aggression will keep his distance.
By maintaining this out-of-reach distance you will enjoy another advantage, should the individual whom you face decide to attack you. His attack and your preemptive reaction will bring about a COLLISION EFFECT, and add whatever weight and momentum your attacker generates toward you, to whatever power and momentum your preemptive action directs toward him.
Violent offenders, generally speaking, will not attempt to attack if they do not feel that their onslaught will be effective, if they feel that they will be hurt, and if they have no assurance that they will be able to get away before the police arrive. Since the impression conveyed by a person who remains steadfastly distanced, alert, and not readily approachable is NOT that this person is susceptible to a surprise attack, assuming a proper off-angled ready position and holding to the right distance might discourage some attacks, to begin with. This of course is what we would most hope for, but we cannot expect it in all cases.
Correct understanding of the principle, and unwavering use of the strategy of employing PROPER DISTANCING will go a long way toward assisting you in both avoidance and in being prepared for preemption, should avoidance be impossible.
One final thing: Whenever you are approached by two or more individuals who you do not know personally, STEP TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE PAIR/GROUP and assume your relaxed ready position facing the closest person. Keep your distance relative to him, outside arm’s reach.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Bare Knuckle Boxing...
... And Punching In Hand-To-Hand Combat
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – October 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Using the clenched fist either as a primary weapon or as a natural weapon with which to attack the facial/head area is WRONG for close combat and self-defense. Those who, correctly noting the deficiencies in the sport of Western boxing insofar as self-defense is concerned, have gravitated to the older (rougher and tougher) "bare knuckle boxing", thinking that this will give them a "boxing system for the street" are misinformed.
The old bare knuckle boxers were tough as nails, and yes, their method of boxing was superior for self-defense to the modern boxing we are accustomed to seeing today. However, the fact that bare knuckle boxing is superior to modern boxing for personal combat by no means demonstrates that bare knuckle boxing is a viable method of combat training, per se. Using a garden hose to attempt to put out a house fire makes more sense than relying on filling, refilling, and repeatedly tossing buckets of water on the fire. BUT NEITHER APPROACH MAKES MUCH REAL SENSE AS A MEANS OF BATTLING A HOUSE FIRE.
Bare knuckle boxers use their clenched fists for normal-fist punching. This is a serious mistake for self-defense or hand-to-hand combat. It is as much a mistake for the bare knuckle boxer as it is for the karate student, since other much more effective and reliable natural weapon hand blows have been proven beyond question to be infinitely better choices for close combat. (We must state here, for the overly sensitive, that we are in no shape, manner, or form deriding bare knuckle boxing, per se. We are speaking only of how this sport stacks up FOR REAL COMBAT.)
To be a true fist fighter who stands any reasonable chance of stopping a dangerous physical assailant, you must be REAL GOOD, an expert, or at least a strong, fit, boxer-in-training with conditioned fists.
Our advice: Waste no time training in bare knuckle boxing if you wish to be able to handle dangerous, real world attackers. You’ll only be getting sidetracked, and you’ll be confusing yourself by training to strike with your FISTS to targets that you should be training to strike with open hands. In the stress and heat of a real emergency you want your extended fingers to jab into your attacker’s eyes, your heel of hand to blast him in the jaw, and your hand-edge to chop at his carotid artery — or throat! Polish kicks to the testicles and side kicks to the knees. Never mind any kind of sporting stuff.
One excellent thing about boxers — bare knuckle boxers and the modern variety — is that the manner in which they hit (NOT the weapons, but the MANNER in which those weapons are trained to generate blows) is far superior to the manner in which the classical/traditional karate/kung fu/taekwondo/ju-jutsu man learns to hit. Learn this now:
Do not use the full turn "corkscrew" type punch, ever — and NEVER, EVER "counterbalance" (i.e. withdraw your opposite fist with equal speed and power to your hip, while delivering the punch)! Corkscrewing results in two problems when employed:
1. The punching arm "wings out" as the punch goes forward, and
2. The wrist twists, and this WEAKENS the critical support required from the wrist when the fist connects with the target. (You can prove this to yourself by standing in front of a heavy bag and driving your most powerful corkscrew punch into the bag. Then try a vertical (palm-in) fist punch. Much stronger.
When punching in an actual hand-to-hand battle, restrict the fist blow (either straight, palm-in, or uppercut, palm up) to the sternum, solar plexus, liver, spleen, testicles, or kidney. That’s it. Never punch to the torso area (too muscular, heavy, and well protected) or the facial/head area (bony contact surface can fracture fingers and hand bones). One minor, rare exception might be a quick fist jab or thrust to the nose, applied simply as a distraction, paving the way for "heavier guns".
Hit like a BOXER hits. No counterbalancing! Counterbalancing actually DETRACTS from the power of your blow. Here’s proof — and I offer it directly from the various karate systems:
When training their blows IN THE AIR karate students easily and naturally employ counterbalancing. The smart snap of the gi, the sharp, neat, upright posture, and the smooth symmetry of delivery, looks great. However, notice that you’ll never see any karate man counterbalance when breaking objects. Why? Because when breaking he must have full, unrestrained, total POWER — power that smashes through (not merely connect "on") the target. Intuitively, a karate man will hit by employing body movement similar to that which a boxer employs. He turns his body into the blow (whether a punch, heel of hand, edge of hand, elbow or whatever).
On a televised "Fight Science" Show comparisons were made between the power delivery of a taekwondo man, a kung fu man, and a boxer. The taekwondo man was built like Mr. Universe, and was an absolutely excellent performer of the taekwondo art. He was fast, lithe, strong, and technically expert. However, despite the boxer’s being perhaps fifteen or more years older, and apparently not in any kind of condition resembling the taekwondoist’s (or the kung fu man’s) IT WAS THE BOXER WHOSE PUNCH REGISTERED THE HARDEST HIT OF ANYONE’S!
Don’t fight with your clenched fists, per se. Use them sparingly, as we have instructed. But do use your body’s natural weapons in the fluid, natural, logically powerful and well-coordinated manner that a boxer uses when he punches. Perhaps boxing lacks the "mystery" and the "intrigue" that appeals to many who gravitate to the martial arts. But boxing teaches practical, fast, natural, and EFFECTIVE use of the body for proper delivery of blows when attacking a human adversary.
If you can find a copy of Jack Dempsey’s classic, CHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTING, buy it and study it. This was our source for learning the "falling step" that we teach in our System. Dempsey was one of the greatest boxers in the sport’s history, in our Country. You will learn more about how to deliver all of the hand and arm blows of hand-to-hand combat and self-defense by studying the principles of hitting as taught in Western boxing than you will by training in classical/traditional karate. Just remember as you begin to apply these principles: Use of the fists per se is strictly limited insofar as actual close combat is concerned.
If your purpose is to become and to remain combat ready then understand clearly that — whether of the modern gloved or of the older "bare knuckle" variety — boxing per se is NOT an adequate or even a recommended skill. Its methods of hitting are superb — but those methods must be applied to and with proven, combat-viable blows, not with clenched fist punches.
Clenched fist punching is for the competitive and for the classical practitioner. Make no mistake about it. And pay no attention to any "bare knuckle fad. Stick with open hand chops, heel of the hand blows, edge of the fist blows, elbow smashes, fingertips thrusts and gouges, and low area kicks. Just learn to employ those devastating actions the way a boxer employs his punches; and you’ll be well prepared for any emergency!
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – October 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
Using the clenched fist either as a primary weapon or as a natural weapon with which to attack the facial/head area is WRONG for close combat and self-defense. Those who, correctly noting the deficiencies in the sport of Western boxing insofar as self-defense is concerned, have gravitated to the older (rougher and tougher) "bare knuckle boxing", thinking that this will give them a "boxing system for the street" are misinformed.
The old bare knuckle boxers were tough as nails, and yes, their method of boxing was superior for self-defense to the modern boxing we are accustomed to seeing today. However, the fact that bare knuckle boxing is superior to modern boxing for personal combat by no means demonstrates that bare knuckle boxing is a viable method of combat training, per se. Using a garden hose to attempt to put out a house fire makes more sense than relying on filling, refilling, and repeatedly tossing buckets of water on the fire. BUT NEITHER APPROACH MAKES MUCH REAL SENSE AS A MEANS OF BATTLING A HOUSE FIRE.
Bare knuckle boxers use their clenched fists for normal-fist punching. This is a serious mistake for self-defense or hand-to-hand combat. It is as much a mistake for the bare knuckle boxer as it is for the karate student, since other much more effective and reliable natural weapon hand blows have been proven beyond question to be infinitely better choices for close combat. (We must state here, for the overly sensitive, that we are in no shape, manner, or form deriding bare knuckle boxing, per se. We are speaking only of how this sport stacks up FOR REAL COMBAT.)
To be a true fist fighter who stands any reasonable chance of stopping a dangerous physical assailant, you must be REAL GOOD, an expert, or at least a strong, fit, boxer-in-training with conditioned fists.
Our advice: Waste no time training in bare knuckle boxing if you wish to be able to handle dangerous, real world attackers. You’ll only be getting sidetracked, and you’ll be confusing yourself by training to strike with your FISTS to targets that you should be training to strike with open hands. In the stress and heat of a real emergency you want your extended fingers to jab into your attacker’s eyes, your heel of hand to blast him in the jaw, and your hand-edge to chop at his carotid artery — or throat! Polish kicks to the testicles and side kicks to the knees. Never mind any kind of sporting stuff.
One excellent thing about boxers — bare knuckle boxers and the modern variety — is that the manner in which they hit (NOT the weapons, but the MANNER in which those weapons are trained to generate blows) is far superior to the manner in which the classical/traditional karate/kung fu/taekwondo/ju-jutsu man learns to hit. Learn this now:
Do not use the full turn "corkscrew" type punch, ever — and NEVER, EVER "counterbalance" (i.e. withdraw your opposite fist with equal speed and power to your hip, while delivering the punch)! Corkscrewing results in two problems when employed:
1. The punching arm "wings out" as the punch goes forward, and
2. The wrist twists, and this WEAKENS the critical support required from the wrist when the fist connects with the target. (You can prove this to yourself by standing in front of a heavy bag and driving your most powerful corkscrew punch into the bag. Then try a vertical (palm-in) fist punch. Much stronger.
When punching in an actual hand-to-hand battle, restrict the fist blow (either straight, palm-in, or uppercut, palm up) to the sternum, solar plexus, liver, spleen, testicles, or kidney. That’s it. Never punch to the torso area (too muscular, heavy, and well protected) or the facial/head area (bony contact surface can fracture fingers and hand bones). One minor, rare exception might be a quick fist jab or thrust to the nose, applied simply as a distraction, paving the way for "heavier guns".
Hit like a BOXER hits. No counterbalancing! Counterbalancing actually DETRACTS from the power of your blow. Here’s proof — and I offer it directly from the various karate systems:
When training their blows IN THE AIR karate students easily and naturally employ counterbalancing. The smart snap of the gi, the sharp, neat, upright posture, and the smooth symmetry of delivery, looks great. However, notice that you’ll never see any karate man counterbalance when breaking objects. Why? Because when breaking he must have full, unrestrained, total POWER — power that smashes through (not merely connect "on") the target. Intuitively, a karate man will hit by employing body movement similar to that which a boxer employs. He turns his body into the blow (whether a punch, heel of hand, edge of hand, elbow or whatever).
On a televised "Fight Science" Show comparisons were made between the power delivery of a taekwondo man, a kung fu man, and a boxer. The taekwondo man was built like Mr. Universe, and was an absolutely excellent performer of the taekwondo art. He was fast, lithe, strong, and technically expert. However, despite the boxer’s being perhaps fifteen or more years older, and apparently not in any kind of condition resembling the taekwondoist’s (or the kung fu man’s) IT WAS THE BOXER WHOSE PUNCH REGISTERED THE HARDEST HIT OF ANYONE’S!
Don’t fight with your clenched fists, per se. Use them sparingly, as we have instructed. But do use your body’s natural weapons in the fluid, natural, logically powerful and well-coordinated manner that a boxer uses when he punches. Perhaps boxing lacks the "mystery" and the "intrigue" that appeals to many who gravitate to the martial arts. But boxing teaches practical, fast, natural, and EFFECTIVE use of the body for proper delivery of blows when attacking a human adversary.
If you can find a copy of Jack Dempsey’s classic, CHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTING, buy it and study it. This was our source for learning the "falling step" that we teach in our System. Dempsey was one of the greatest boxers in the sport’s history, in our Country. You will learn more about how to deliver all of the hand and arm blows of hand-to-hand combat and self-defense by studying the principles of hitting as taught in Western boxing than you will by training in classical/traditional karate. Just remember as you begin to apply these principles: Use of the fists per se is strictly limited insofar as actual close combat is concerned.
If your purpose is to become and to remain combat ready then understand clearly that — whether of the modern gloved or of the older "bare knuckle" variety — boxing per se is NOT an adequate or even a recommended skill. Its methods of hitting are superb — but those methods must be applied to and with proven, combat-viable blows, not with clenched fist punches.
Clenched fist punching is for the competitive and for the classical practitioner. Make no mistake about it. And pay no attention to any "bare knuckle fad. Stick with open hand chops, heel of the hand blows, edge of the fist blows, elbow smashes, fingertips thrusts and gouges, and low area kicks. Just learn to employ those devastating actions the way a boxer employs his punches; and you’ll be well prepared for any emergency!
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Two Unpleasant Facts
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
THE first is that most violent attacks today involve multiple assailants.
The second is that most violent attacks also involve assailants who are armed.
The above (for anyone having a problem with reading comprehension) does not mean that "all" attacks or that "every" attack involves multiple assailants and weapons. There are still plenty of instances when punks, bullies, and assorted other scum who like to make trouble, "go it alone and unarmed" and simply attempt to gratify their despicably insane desires and drives by targeting some soul whom they feel that they can push around, injure, humiliate, beat up, rob, or even kill without the assistance of fellow bacteria to back up their efforts. However, THE MAJORITY OF UNAVOIDABLE, VIOLENT AND DANGEROUS PHYSICAL ATTACKS THAT OCCUR ON THE MEAN STREETS AND IN THE HOMES OF URBAN AND SUBURBAN AMERICA TODAY involve multiple and/or armed scum.
The implications of these two facts are profound. They at once tell us volumes about the state of moral and cultural decrepitude that our society has degenerated to, while at the same time teaching us some valuable lessons regarding THAT WHICH WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO BE PREPARED TO DEFEND OURSELVES.
Since even the worthless dailies and the carefully prepared and doctored evening "news" reports on TV have (unwittingly) presented all that any intelligent and objective individual might require in the way of evidence that Western culture is FINISHED, we will not dwell on this fact. Besides, it makes us nauseous even to think about it.
We'll shift right to the matter of preparing for the possibility of being forced to defend against more than a single adversary who attacks us, and/or for the possibility (read: probability) of having to contend with WEAPONS during any physical encounter.
What — really — must we understand about these types of situations, and what must we do to be reasonably sure that, if one of them ever comes to us, we stand a good chance of surviving and prevailing over the odds?
The first thing to understand is that life-threatening physical attack situations amount to situations of WAR. We are not "competing" when we undertake to fight a war — we are battling for survival! There are no rules in war, save one: WIN! The very concept of ethics, fairness, sportsmanship, or even decency, is suspended "for the duration". And when the "war" is a self-defense emergency that has been foisted upon an unfortunate victim, IT IS THE ATTACKER(S) WHO BEARS FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT OCCURS, AND IT IS THE ATTACKER WHO HAS CHOSEN TO SUSPEND ETHICS, FAIRNESS, SPORTSMANSHIP, AND DECENCY, BY VIRTUE OF THAT WHICH HE HAS CHOSEN TO DO. If a defender is to have a chance to prevail in such an awful situation, he cannot and must not be burdened with concerns for such humane considerations that his attacker(s) has disregarded.
The second thing to understand about these situations is that THEY ARE ALWAYS LIFE-THREATENING. Whether multiple/and/or armed assailants are youngsters or older individuals, and regardless of their gender the threat that they pose is a lethal one. Thus, the reaction that a defender is not only justified in generating, but also URGED TO APPLY WITHOUT HESITATION, is deadly force.
The third lesson we must learn is that tactics must be suitable to the emergency. "Training for self-defense" by restricting oneself to one-on-one type predicaments, or to the assumption that no weapons will be involved (unless we SEE a weapon) is ridiculous. The proper tactical imperative for the student of close combat and self-defense is to train in the skills that he is acquiring by assuming that — even when he is not initially aware of the fact — the individual whom he initially confronts has assistance, and is armed. Statistics conform the validity of such an assumption.
The fourth lesson that offers is that those who train for self-defense must train in techniques that enable them to — a) Inflict immediate and grievous injury, without tying oneself up with any single, individual adversary, and b) React under any conditions, anywhere, with skills that are reliably simple and that have been retained without any need for excessive practice. "Training for a contest" is a short-term, young man;s game. Training for self-defense is a LIFETIME PURSUIT. If the skills with which an individual trains are not retainable and DOABLE when he is in hs 70's and 80's, then what possible value can they have for real world self-defense? Remember: One becomes a more attractive target for human scum when one becomes old; one cannot claim that one is "retired from competition" and expect a trio of armed home invaders or street bacteria to retreat!
The fifth critical thing to learn from looking at the facts is that ONE MUST INCLUDE MODERN WEAPONS IN ONE'S TRAINING AND STUDY OF SELF-PROTECTION. Criminals carry and use firearms, knives, and other deadly weapons. There is no reason on earth why decent people should not avail themselves of such weapons, also — and make themselves MUCH BETTER SKILLED AND DANGEROUS WITH THOSE WEAPONS THAN ARE THE SCUM WHO WOULD PREY UPON THEM.
In our advocacy of the attitude, skills, armament, and tactical considerations that we have presented we wish to make it clear that in no sense do we condone, advocate, or in any manner sanction the breaking of any laws. We are simply trying to provide a wake up call to those whose sense of practicality may have been less than desirable in their efforts to prepare for actual, real world emergencies.
We have never believed that there was any reason why decent human beings should not avail themselves of the fullest measure of readiness for dealing with any who might attempt to violate them. And in today's sick and violent world, "those who would attempt to violate them" generally move in packs (like hyena), and carry weapons to assist their evil purpose.
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted with Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
THE first is that most violent attacks today involve multiple assailants.
The second is that most violent attacks also involve assailants who are armed.
The above (for anyone having a problem with reading comprehension) does not mean that "all" attacks or that "every" attack involves multiple assailants and weapons. There are still plenty of instances when punks, bullies, and assorted other scum who like to make trouble, "go it alone and unarmed" and simply attempt to gratify their despicably insane desires and drives by targeting some soul whom they feel that they can push around, injure, humiliate, beat up, rob, or even kill without the assistance of fellow bacteria to back up their efforts. However, THE MAJORITY OF UNAVOIDABLE, VIOLENT AND DANGEROUS PHYSICAL ATTACKS THAT OCCUR ON THE MEAN STREETS AND IN THE HOMES OF URBAN AND SUBURBAN AMERICA TODAY involve multiple and/or armed scum.
The implications of these two facts are profound. They at once tell us volumes about the state of moral and cultural decrepitude that our society has degenerated to, while at the same time teaching us some valuable lessons regarding THAT WHICH WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO BE PREPARED TO DEFEND OURSELVES.
Since even the worthless dailies and the carefully prepared and doctored evening "news" reports on TV have (unwittingly) presented all that any intelligent and objective individual might require in the way of evidence that Western culture is FINISHED, we will not dwell on this fact. Besides, it makes us nauseous even to think about it.
We'll shift right to the matter of preparing for the possibility of being forced to defend against more than a single adversary who attacks us, and/or for the possibility (read: probability) of having to contend with WEAPONS during any physical encounter.
What — really — must we understand about these types of situations, and what must we do to be reasonably sure that, if one of them ever comes to us, we stand a good chance of surviving and prevailing over the odds?
The first thing to understand is that life-threatening physical attack situations amount to situations of WAR. We are not "competing" when we undertake to fight a war — we are battling for survival! There are no rules in war, save one: WIN! The very concept of ethics, fairness, sportsmanship, or even decency, is suspended "for the duration". And when the "war" is a self-defense emergency that has been foisted upon an unfortunate victim, IT IS THE ATTACKER(S) WHO BEARS FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT OCCURS, AND IT IS THE ATTACKER WHO HAS CHOSEN TO SUSPEND ETHICS, FAIRNESS, SPORTSMANSHIP, AND DECENCY, BY VIRTUE OF THAT WHICH HE HAS CHOSEN TO DO. If a defender is to have a chance to prevail in such an awful situation, he cannot and must not be burdened with concerns for such humane considerations that his attacker(s) has disregarded.
The second thing to understand about these situations is that THEY ARE ALWAYS LIFE-THREATENING. Whether multiple/and/or armed assailants are youngsters or older individuals, and regardless of their gender the threat that they pose is a lethal one. Thus, the reaction that a defender is not only justified in generating, but also URGED TO APPLY WITHOUT HESITATION, is deadly force.
The third lesson we must learn is that tactics must be suitable to the emergency. "Training for self-defense" by restricting oneself to one-on-one type predicaments, or to the assumption that no weapons will be involved (unless we SEE a weapon) is ridiculous. The proper tactical imperative for the student of close combat and self-defense is to train in the skills that he is acquiring by assuming that — even when he is not initially aware of the fact — the individual whom he initially confronts has assistance, and is armed. Statistics conform the validity of such an assumption.
The fourth lesson that offers is that those who train for self-defense must train in techniques that enable them to — a) Inflict immediate and grievous injury, without tying oneself up with any single, individual adversary, and b) React under any conditions, anywhere, with skills that are reliably simple and that have been retained without any need for excessive practice. "Training for a contest" is a short-term, young man;s game. Training for self-defense is a LIFETIME PURSUIT. If the skills with which an individual trains are not retainable and DOABLE when he is in hs 70's and 80's, then what possible value can they have for real world self-defense? Remember: One becomes a more attractive target for human scum when one becomes old; one cannot claim that one is "retired from competition" and expect a trio of armed home invaders or street bacteria to retreat!
The fifth critical thing to learn from looking at the facts is that ONE MUST INCLUDE MODERN WEAPONS IN ONE'S TRAINING AND STUDY OF SELF-PROTECTION. Criminals carry and use firearms, knives, and other deadly weapons. There is no reason on earth why decent people should not avail themselves of such weapons, also — and make themselves MUCH BETTER SKILLED AND DANGEROUS WITH THOSE WEAPONS THAN ARE THE SCUM WHO WOULD PREY UPON THEM.
In our advocacy of the attitude, skills, armament, and tactical considerations that we have presented we wish to make it clear that in no sense do we condone, advocate, or in any manner sanction the breaking of any laws. We are simply trying to provide a wake up call to those whose sense of practicality may have been less than desirable in their efforts to prepare for actual, real world emergencies.
We have never believed that there was any reason why decent human beings should not avail themselves of the fullest measure of readiness for dealing with any who might attempt to violate them. And in today's sick and violent world, "those who would attempt to violate them" generally move in packs (like hyena), and carry weapons to assist their evil purpose.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Remember Who Your Enemy Is -
And Train In Accordance With What He Is Known To Do!
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
THE incredible lack of realism and absence of just plain common sense that exists in the martial arts field when it comes to PRACTICAL SELF-DEFENSE is mind-boggling. We have "hitters" ridiculously practicing jumping and spinning kicks, high area body kicks, clenched fist punching, sparring, and archaic methods of linear blocking, as well as totally irrelevant classical kata. We have "grapplers" focusing on groundwork and one-on-one competitive matches, which emphasize "submission" and "pinning" actions, and then we have hybrids(!) — i.e. the inevitable compromisers who combine clenched fist pummeling with groundwork (laced, of course, with a sprinkling of elbowing, throwing, and one or two other tidbits). And of course there is not a single thing wrong with any of these things, until or unless you specify "PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND REAL WORLD PERSONAL DEFENSE" as your training objective. That changes everything, immediately.
Yes, competition fighters are genuinely tough fellows, and yes — certainly — many of them can defend themselves in actual situations. No doubt about it. However, the same can be said of boxers, wrestlers, judo men, kick boxers, and so on. None of which demonstrates anything at all of relevance insofar as establishing that which is required in HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT and EMERGENCY SELF-DEFENSE SITUATIONS, when the entire reason and purpose is preparing for combat and self-defense as opposed to competition.
To use an analogy with firearms:
An experienced and competent big game hunter can certainly employ his bolt action .378 weatherby magnum rifle (an upgrade of the brutal .375) in a battlefield environment, and perhaps even be successful in dropping an attacking soldier or two. But that does not make the .378 round, the bolt action rifle that fires it, or the marksman/hunter who employs this awesome combination, any kind of "model of that which is best suited to" REAL MILITARY BATTLEFIELD ENGAGEMENTS. A .308 battle rifle — designed, intended, and constructed specifically for warfighting — would be the intelligent man's choice, for going to war. And, similarly, the type and style of firing that the big game hunter excels in when dropping African big game, and which — admittedly — he may be able to apply to antipersonnel engagements, is hardly the type and style of rifle shooting appropriate to combat.
Self-defense and hand-to-hand combat is a subject and study unto itself. Many in the martial arts do not (or do want to) realize this, and so they continually equate that which is sporting, aesthetic, classical, or theatrical with that which works in combat.
Self-defense is war. It is a microcosmic war between individuals, instead of between nations; but it is war, nonetheless. Where and when an activity is presented as "self-defense" in a non-warlike manner, then the term self-defense becomes a misnomer. It is self-defense when one individual is set upon by another, and when force or the threat of force is utilized for the personal satisfaction, gratification, or gain of the attacker against an innocent victim.
• Being jumped in the street by one or more savages is a self-defense situation
• Being seized suddenly from behind is a self-defense situation
• Being attacked by someone using a knife, club, firearm, or other hand-held weapon (or implement which he employs as a weapon) is a self-defense situation
• Being confronted by a punk, troublemaker, or bully whose intention it is to terrorize, push-around, beat up, intimidate or otherwise torment you is a self-defense situation
• Being suddenly aware that your home is being broken into — invaded — by marauding scum is a self-defense situation
• Being set upon by a deranged individual who proceeds, suddenly and without provocation, to violently assault you is a self-defense situation
• Being targeted for a kidnapping is a self-defense situation
• Being with a family member or other loved one and witnessing their being attacked is a self-defense situation
• Being confronted by some lout who proceeds for whatever reason to become physically harassing and abusive — pushing, leaning on, or shoving you — is a self-defense situation
• Being approached by someone who unlawfully blocks your path and refuses to allow you to leave the area is a self-defense situation
• Being run off the road and then attacked by a careful of human debris who are "out for kicks" is a self-defense situation
• Being threatened with bodily harm and observing the threatener reach for what you are certain is a concealed weapon is a self-defense situation
• Being set upon by one or more punks while you are riding on a public conveyance is a self-defense situation
• Being the victim of a carjacking in which you as well as your vehicle is the criminal's objective, is a self-defense situation
• Being the intended target of forcible rape constitutes a self-defense situation
Need we continue?
• Agreeing to a physical contest with someone who wishes to participate, and where there are rules and regulations of any kind — plus a referee — is NOT a self-defense situation
• Participating in a judo, boxing, karate, wrestling, kick boxing, or other competition match or event is NOT a self-defense situation
• Mindlessly agreeing to "step outside" (or remain inside!) and fight with someone is NOT a self-defense situation
If it is your purpose to prepare for the realities attendant the unfortunate predicament of finding yourself obliged to defend against serious criminal violence, then look to how violent offenders attack. Analyze their modus operandi. Over the last several hundred years it has been so well documented that we can tell with near certainty how attacks will occur. Certainly, every situation is "different"; but in a very real and provable sense, ALL SITUATIONS IN WHICH VIOLENCE IS DIRECTED AGAINST VICTIMS, ARE ALSO — PREDICTABLY — THE SAME. The types of situations in which violence occurs and the manner in which offenders move against their target-victims is known, is ascertainable, and is quantifiable.
Situational awareness (alertness) is of course rule number one for those wishing to be prepared for an emergency. Agreed-upon contests of all types begin at appointed times. Attacks may begin at any time. And anywhere.
Once having determined that one has been targeted for a hostile approach by one or more others who appear to be intent upon the use of force, escape and avoidance — if possible, without incurring undo risk to yourself or to someone else — is the all round best course of action. When escape and avoidance is not possible, then FEROCIOUS PREEMPTIVE ATTACK — relentless, "ferocious, preemptive attack"! — is the wisest course. Seize the initiative and go after your attackers! Violently, mercilessly, viciously, and with every ounce of strength, resolve, fury, and determination you can muster.
Such techniques as are popularly labeled "self-defense techniques" are really the least desirable techniques upon which to rely in an emergency, because these techniques are applied against a full blown attack, and only after the attack has gotten fully underway. These techniques, providing that they are of real quality and not mere "artistic exercises", are necessary in a comprehensive program, of course — but only as a backup to techniques of PREEMPTION.
We train in American Combato then, to react to violence in one of three ways:
We AVOID it (the best of all possible options)
We PREEMPT the assailant (best option when avoidance is impossible)
We COUNTERATTACK the attacker's action (the least desirable option, but nevertheless one we all must be prepared to employ)
Taking a specific, concrete example:
If you notice that a suspicious. individual is walking toward you aa you proceed down the street your wisest course of action is to unostentatiously alter your own route and cross the street. AVOIDANCE.
If, as you cross the street, you observe that this individual has cued in on you and has crossed the street also, heading in your direction, you shift immediately to "condition orange". As the individual confronts you, you are in your ready position, distanced properly, and fully prepared for trouble (without revealing in any way that this is the case).
If the individual suddenly commences an aggressive action, you immediately attack. You lash out with a kick and break his leg, thrust a sharp fingertips attack to his eyes, or otherwise drive into him, preempting his onslaught. PREEMPTION.
Only in an instance when you were too carelessly oblivious to the stranger's approach, would you forego avoidance and continue to walk into a questionable situation. And, only if you were perhaps in "condition white" would the individual whose approach you had eventually to deal with as an attack need to be "countered" — since only because you blew the "avoidance" and the "preemption" options did it become necessary to handle his full blown attack with a reactive, "counterattacking" technique.
The important thing of course is that we train so as to be able to do that which we must (ie avoid, preempt, or counter) in suitably realistic contexts.
No one "squares off" in a self-defense situation or "agrees to fight". A self-defense emergency is like an ASSASSINATION attempt, not like a "contest". Prepare for it accordingly.
Many, many years ago (or at least it seems like many, many years ago!) we learned something very valuable from one of our beloved teachers: Charlie Nelson. We learned to clip and to study all news stories from local and even out-of-town newspapers regarding violent crimes. These stories, and not ridiculous attempts to master "contest strategies" and "winning actions" for competition will reveal precisely that which one is up against when one wishes to prepare for real world self-defense.
There is also personal experience, if one has been unfortunate enough to have amassed any.
There is also speaking with seasoned street cops.
There is also speaking with psychiatrists and psychologists who have specialized in studying criminal violence.
There is also interviewing and garnering information from military combat veterans (Note: this does NOT mean anyone who has served in the military. It means those who have been in hand-to-hand combat and who know — firsthand — what it involves.)
And finally there is the individual who has been victimized and who has been fortunate enough to survive the incident.
All of the foregoing is highly recommended. We have unceasingly been utilizing these methods and means of acquiring reliable knowledge about close combat and self-defense since the late 1960's. And we continue to use these methods, whenever and wherever we are able, as frequently as we can.
We respectfully suggest: If you are after really reliable and practical doctrine regarding close combat and personal defense, you follow our example and our advice.
In preparing for survival one cannot be too "realistic".
Bradley J. Steiner
© COPYRIGHT 2009 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – September 2009 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
THE incredible lack of realism and absence of just plain common sense that exists in the martial arts field when it comes to PRACTICAL SELF-DEFENSE is mind-boggling. We have "hitters" ridiculously practicing jumping and spinning kicks, high area body kicks, clenched fist punching, sparring, and archaic methods of linear blocking, as well as totally irrelevant classical kata. We have "grapplers" focusing on groundwork and one-on-one competitive matches, which emphasize "submission" and "pinning" actions, and then we have hybrids(!) — i.e. the inevitable compromisers who combine clenched fist pummeling with groundwork (laced, of course, with a sprinkling of elbowing, throwing, and one or two other tidbits). And of course there is not a single thing wrong with any of these things, until or unless you specify "PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND REAL WORLD PERSONAL DEFENSE" as your training objective. That changes everything, immediately.
Yes, competition fighters are genuinely tough fellows, and yes — certainly — many of them can defend themselves in actual situations. No doubt about it. However, the same can be said of boxers, wrestlers, judo men, kick boxers, and so on. None of which demonstrates anything at all of relevance insofar as establishing that which is required in HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT and EMERGENCY SELF-DEFENSE SITUATIONS, when the entire reason and purpose is preparing for combat and self-defense as opposed to competition.
To use an analogy with firearms:
An experienced and competent big game hunter can certainly employ his bolt action .378 weatherby magnum rifle (an upgrade of the brutal .375) in a battlefield environment, and perhaps even be successful in dropping an attacking soldier or two. But that does not make the .378 round, the bolt action rifle that fires it, or the marksman/hunter who employs this awesome combination, any kind of "model of that which is best suited to" REAL MILITARY BATTLEFIELD ENGAGEMENTS. A .308 battle rifle — designed, intended, and constructed specifically for warfighting — would be the intelligent man's choice, for going to war. And, similarly, the type and style of firing that the big game hunter excels in when dropping African big game, and which — admittedly — he may be able to apply to antipersonnel engagements, is hardly the type and style of rifle shooting appropriate to combat.
Self-defense and hand-to-hand combat is a subject and study unto itself. Many in the martial arts do not (or do want to) realize this, and so they continually equate that which is sporting, aesthetic, classical, or theatrical with that which works in combat.
Self-defense is war. It is a microcosmic war between individuals, instead of between nations; but it is war, nonetheless. Where and when an activity is presented as "self-defense" in a non-warlike manner, then the term self-defense becomes a misnomer. It is self-defense when one individual is set upon by another, and when force or the threat of force is utilized for the personal satisfaction, gratification, or gain of the attacker against an innocent victim.
• Being jumped in the street by one or more savages is a self-defense situation
• Being seized suddenly from behind is a self-defense situation
• Being attacked by someone using a knife, club, firearm, or other hand-held weapon (or implement which he employs as a weapon) is a self-defense situation
• Being confronted by a punk, troublemaker, or bully whose intention it is to terrorize, push-around, beat up, intimidate or otherwise torment you is a self-defense situation
• Being suddenly aware that your home is being broken into — invaded — by marauding scum is a self-defense situation
• Being set upon by a deranged individual who proceeds, suddenly and without provocation, to violently assault you is a self-defense situation
• Being targeted for a kidnapping is a self-defense situation
• Being with a family member or other loved one and witnessing their being attacked is a self-defense situation
• Being confronted by some lout who proceeds for whatever reason to become physically harassing and abusive — pushing, leaning on, or shoving you — is a self-defense situation
• Being approached by someone who unlawfully blocks your path and refuses to allow you to leave the area is a self-defense situation
• Being run off the road and then attacked by a careful of human debris who are "out for kicks" is a self-defense situation
• Being threatened with bodily harm and observing the threatener reach for what you are certain is a concealed weapon is a self-defense situation
• Being set upon by one or more punks while you are riding on a public conveyance is a self-defense situation
• Being the victim of a carjacking in which you as well as your vehicle is the criminal's objective, is a self-defense situation
• Being the intended target of forcible rape constitutes a self-defense situation
Need we continue?
• Agreeing to a physical contest with someone who wishes to participate, and where there are rules and regulations of any kind — plus a referee — is NOT a self-defense situation
• Participating in a judo, boxing, karate, wrestling, kick boxing, or other competition match or event is NOT a self-defense situation
• Mindlessly agreeing to "step outside" (or remain inside!) and fight with someone is NOT a self-defense situation
If it is your purpose to prepare for the realities attendant the unfortunate predicament of finding yourself obliged to defend against serious criminal violence, then look to how violent offenders attack. Analyze their modus operandi. Over the last several hundred years it has been so well documented that we can tell with near certainty how attacks will occur. Certainly, every situation is "different"; but in a very real and provable sense, ALL SITUATIONS IN WHICH VIOLENCE IS DIRECTED AGAINST VICTIMS, ARE ALSO — PREDICTABLY — THE SAME. The types of situations in which violence occurs and the manner in which offenders move against their target-victims is known, is ascertainable, and is quantifiable.
Situational awareness (alertness) is of course rule number one for those wishing to be prepared for an emergency. Agreed-upon contests of all types begin at appointed times. Attacks may begin at any time. And anywhere.
Once having determined that one has been targeted for a hostile approach by one or more others who appear to be intent upon the use of force, escape and avoidance — if possible, without incurring undo risk to yourself or to someone else — is the all round best course of action. When escape and avoidance is not possible, then FEROCIOUS PREEMPTIVE ATTACK — relentless, "ferocious, preemptive attack"! — is the wisest course. Seize the initiative and go after your attackers! Violently, mercilessly, viciously, and with every ounce of strength, resolve, fury, and determination you can muster.
Such techniques as are popularly labeled "self-defense techniques" are really the least desirable techniques upon which to rely in an emergency, because these techniques are applied against a full blown attack, and only after the attack has gotten fully underway. These techniques, providing that they are of real quality and not mere "artistic exercises", are necessary in a comprehensive program, of course — but only as a backup to techniques of PREEMPTION.
We train in American Combato then, to react to violence in one of three ways:
We AVOID it (the best of all possible options)
We PREEMPT the assailant (best option when avoidance is impossible)
We COUNTERATTACK the attacker's action (the least desirable option, but nevertheless one we all must be prepared to employ)
Taking a specific, concrete example:
If you notice that a suspicious. individual is walking toward you aa you proceed down the street your wisest course of action is to unostentatiously alter your own route and cross the street. AVOIDANCE.
If, as you cross the street, you observe that this individual has cued in on you and has crossed the street also, heading in your direction, you shift immediately to "condition orange". As the individual confronts you, you are in your ready position, distanced properly, and fully prepared for trouble (without revealing in any way that this is the case).
If the individual suddenly commences an aggressive action, you immediately attack. You lash out with a kick and break his leg, thrust a sharp fingertips attack to his eyes, or otherwise drive into him, preempting his onslaught. PREEMPTION.
Only in an instance when you were too carelessly oblivious to the stranger's approach, would you forego avoidance and continue to walk into a questionable situation. And, only if you were perhaps in "condition white" would the individual whose approach you had eventually to deal with as an attack need to be "countered" — since only because you blew the "avoidance" and the "preemption" options did it become necessary to handle his full blown attack with a reactive, "counterattacking" technique.
The important thing of course is that we train so as to be able to do that which we must (ie avoid, preempt, or counter) in suitably realistic contexts.
No one "squares off" in a self-defense situation or "agrees to fight". A self-defense emergency is like an ASSASSINATION attempt, not like a "contest". Prepare for it accordingly.
Many, many years ago (or at least it seems like many, many years ago!) we learned something very valuable from one of our beloved teachers: Charlie Nelson. We learned to clip and to study all news stories from local and even out-of-town newspapers regarding violent crimes. These stories, and not ridiculous attempts to master "contest strategies" and "winning actions" for competition will reveal precisely that which one is up against when one wishes to prepare for real world self-defense.
There is also personal experience, if one has been unfortunate enough to have amassed any.
There is also speaking with seasoned street cops.
There is also speaking with psychiatrists and psychologists who have specialized in studying criminal violence.
There is also interviewing and garnering information from military combat veterans (Note: this does NOT mean anyone who has served in the military. It means those who have been in hand-to-hand combat and who know — firsthand — what it involves.)
And finally there is the individual who has been victimized and who has been fortunate enough to survive the incident.
All of the foregoing is highly recommended. We have unceasingly been utilizing these methods and means of acquiring reliable knowledge about close combat and self-defense since the late 1960's. And we continue to use these methods, whenever and wherever we are able, as frequently as we can.
We respectfully suggest: If you are after really reliable and practical doctrine regarding close combat and personal defense, you follow our example and our advice.
In preparing for survival one cannot be too "realistic".
Bradley J. Steiner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)