jcd11235 0 #251 July 22, 2009 QuoteSo are you Rambo? Or Master Lee Neither. Nor have I ever claimed to be. I'm pretty much a pacifist whenever I can afford that luxury. I have, however, studied and trained in the use of weapons (in the capacity of both martial arts and military).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #252 July 22, 2009 Should are you "Obi-Wan" or "Master Yoda"? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #253 July 23, 2009 QuoteNeither. Nor have I ever claimed to be... You claimed it right here: "A cutting blade instills fear in you, perhaps. As I was trained, against an attacker with a knife, expect to be cut but avoid being stabbed." QuoteI have, however, studied and trained in the use of weapons (in the capacity of both martial arts and military). Great, but I know plenty of people that were trained in MA to include knives and when they were cut for the first time they froze. I also can list lots of people that were trained to deal with malfunctions, yet still made a crater or are only around due to an AAD."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #254 July 23, 2009 Quote Should are you "Obi-Wan" or "Master Yoda"? Write your question in English could you?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #255 July 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteNeither. Nor have I ever claimed to be... You claimed it right here: "A cutting blade instills fear in you, perhaps. As I was trained, against an attacker with a knife, expect to be cut but avoid being stabbed." That in no way implies that I am "Rambo," "Master Lee," or any other master. Surely your reading comprehension is not lacking to such an extent that you really don't understand that, is it? Many people have had weapons training without being or claiming to be masters. Recognizing that getting cut should be expected in a knife fight is as basic as recognizing that getting punched should be expected in a fist fight. It doesn't take any sort of master to understand that concept, only very minimal exposure to nearly any sort of martial arts or weapons training. QuoteGreat, but I know plenty of people that were trained in MA to include knives and when they were cut for the first time they froze. That certainly doesn't imply that all people with such training freeze in such a situation. Experienced skydivers have also gone in due to freezing and failing to implement their emergency procedures, but, many, many more have successfully cut away malfunctions and had uneventful reserve deployments and landings. What makes you think a gun would help someone who would freeze up when faced with a knife? People react with the tools they have available, not because of the tools they have available. QuoteI also can list lots of people that were trained to deal with malfunctions, yet still made a crater or are only around due to an AAD. See above.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #256 July 23, 2009 QuoteRecognizing that getting cut should be expected in a knife fight is as basic as recognizing that getting punched should be expected in a fist fight. [Untouchables]They pull a knife, you pull a gun[/Untouchables] If someone has decided they are going to attempt to commit bodily harm to me, I'll be damned if I'm going to meet them on their own terms. "Fair fights" are for the boxing ring.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #257 July 23, 2009 Quote "Fair fights" are for the boxing ring. Read my sig lineIf you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #258 July 23, 2009 Quote Quote Should are you "Obi-Wan" or "Master Yoda"? Write your question in English could you? Sorry, I got distracted in the middle of the post--danger of having a toddler. I had started out to write "should we call you..." and then came back and finished with "are you..."-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #259 July 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteRecognizing that getting cut should be expected in a knife fight is as basic as recognizing that getting punched should be expected in a fist fight. [Untouchables]They pull a knife, you pull a gun[/Untouchables] If someone has decided they are going to attempt to commit bodily harm to me, I'll be damned if I'm going to meet them on their own terms. That's all well and good, if one has been trained in the use of firearms sufficiently to use them competently in a high stress situation (<-- applies to any weapon, not just firearms), and if one has time to draw, aim, and fire the gun in the time that lapses between the time one realizes he/she is being confronted with a knife and the knife wielding attacker tries to use the knife. Tueller's research suggests that this is not always the case, and might even be unlikely in some settings. Don't pull a knife in a gunfight is good advice. So is Don't try to pull a gun during a knife fight. My point is, the situation usually dictates what actions are feasible or not. The mindset that having a gun always gives one the upper hand against other weapons leaves one at risk of being severely injured or killed while trying to draw a gun. For the record, IMO, self defense is about escaping the threat. Engaging the threat is justified for self defense only when required in order to escape the threat.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #260 July 24, 2009 QuoteThat in no way implies that I am "Rambo," "Master Lee," or any other master. No, but it implies that you THINK you are. QuoteSurely your reading comprehension is not lacking to such an extent that you really don't understand that, is it? No, my comprehension is spot on... You were bragging and now trying to pack peddle since it makes you sound full of yourself. QuoteMany people have had weapons training without being or claiming to be masters. Ah, but they don't normally try to belittle others, then try to brag on themselves.... You did. QuoteThat certainly doesn't imply that all people with such training freeze in such a situation. Unless you have been in that situation you don't know how you will react. QuoteWhat makes you think a gun would help someone who would freeze up when faced with a knife? People who think they have the upper hand tend not to be as afraid. They feel they have the ability to do something and are empowered. This is a very simple concept anyone that has had any training or experience already knows. QuotePeople react with the tools they have available, not because of the tools they have available. So you still think a guy will rush a machine gun nest with a toothpick huh?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #261 July 24, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Should are you "Obi-Wan" or "Master Yoda"? Write your question in English could you? Sorry, I got distracted in the middle of the post--danger of having a toddler. I had started out to write "should we call you..." and then came back and finished with "are you..." Fair enough. Of the two, I have more in common with Obi Wan (i.e. I'm a male human). The differences outnumber the similarities though. I don't have a light saber (not that I don't think it would be a cool toy), I don't own a hooded cloak, I've never been beyond the atmosphere of Earth, and my understanding of The Force involves mass multiplied by the second derivative of position with respect to time. Edit to add: May the Force be with you. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #262 July 24, 2009 Quote Quote That in no way implies that I am "Rambo," "Master Lee," or any other master. No, but it implies that you THINK you are. No, it doesn't. You're smart enough to know that. Quote No, my comprehension is spot on. Apparently not. Quote You were bragging and now trying to pack peddle since it makes you sound full of yourself. No, I was in no way bragging. Quote Quote Many people have had weapons training without being or claiming to be masters. Ah, but they don't normally try to belittle others, then try to brag on themselves.... You did. Nope. I didn't do that, either. I love all the unsubstantiated accusations you're throwing my way, though. Quote Quote That certainly doesn't imply that all people with such training freeze in such a situation. Unless you have been in that situation you don't know how you will react. Agreed. Quote Quote What makes you think a gun would help someone who would freeze up when faced with a knife? People who think they have the upper hand tend not to be as afraid. They feel they have the ability to do something and are empowered. This is a very simple concept anyone that has had any training or experience already knows. That's a fair point. I already listed several objects allowed on planes that would give me the belief that I had the (decisive) upper hand against an attacker with a box cutter It is also worth mentioning that having a gun and having the will and ability to use it in a high stress situation are not the same things. Quote So you still think a guy will rush a machine gun nest with a toothpick huh? Ah, there's your straw man argument again. We are talking about defending against box cutter wielding attackers, not machine gun emplacements. Surely you can recognize the difference.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #263 July 24, 2009 QuoteAh, there's your straw man argument again. We are talking about defending against box cutter wielding attackers, not machine gun emplacements. Surely you can recognize the difference. You said, "People react with the tools they have available, not because of the tools they have available. " So then your position is that a true warrior with just a toothpick will fight an opponent that is better armed simply because they are true warriors. QuoteIt is also worth mentioning that having a gun and having the will and ability to use it in a high stress situation are not the same things. And as I said before, and you agreed, a person who thinks they have the upper hand is much more likely to act."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #264 July 24, 2009 QuoteThat's all well and good, if one has been trained in the use of firearms sufficiently to use them competently in a high stress situation (<-- applies to any weapon, not just firearms), and if one has time to draw, aim, and fire the gun in the time that lapses between the time one realizes he/she is being confronted with a knife and the knife wielding attacker tries to use the knife. Tueller's research suggests that this is not always the case, and might even be unlikely in some settings. Agreed. QuoteDon't pull a knife in a gunfight is good advice. So is Don't try to pull a gun during a knife fight. My point is, the situation usually dictates what actions are feasible or not. The mindset that having a gun always gives one the upper hand against other weapons leaves one at risk of being severely injured or killed while trying to draw a gun. There *are* tactics for close range combatives using a firearm, but in general, agreed. QuoteFor the record, IMO, self defense is about escaping the threat. Engaging the threat is justified for self defense only when required in order to escape the threat. I think a better description would be: defending yourself AFTER you have been unable to escape the situation/threat. The objective at that point is to STOP the attack with whatever means are necessary.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #265 July 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteAh, there's your straw man argument again. We are talking about defending against box cutter wielding attackers, not machine gun emplacements. Surely you can recognize the difference. You said, "People react with the tools they have available, not because of the tools they have available. " So then your position is that a true warrior with just a toothpick will fight an opponent that is better armed simply because they are true warriors. No, that's not my position. A true warrior would react, but that reaction wouldn't necessarily be to fight. In this discussion, however, the bad guys were not "better armed," a point you keep (conveniently) overlooking. QuoteAnd as I said before, and you agreed, a person who thinks they have the upper hand is much more likely to act. Again, their is no reason to believe that there was nobody among the 70+ passengers who understood that they had objects at their disposal that could be used as much more effective weapons than box cutters. They didn't act? Why not? (Oh yeah, they didn't have access to the cockpit.) If they didn't act without guns, I wouldn't rely on them to act with a gun, either.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #266 July 24, 2009 QuoteThere *are* tactics for close range combatives using a firearm, but in general, agreed. True. As with any weapon, (generally) the more training one has, the more options one has at their disposal w/r/t that weapon. QuoteQuoteFor the record, IMO, self defense is about escaping the threat. Engaging the threat is justified for self defense only when required in order to escape the threat. I think a better description would be: defending yourself AFTER you have been unable to escape the situation/threat. I think that part is just a semantics difference. QuoteThe objective at that point is to STOP the attack with whatever means are necessary. Here I don't quite agree (or I'm reading something slightly different in your reply than what you intended). IMO, the objective at that point is to fight for an opportunity to escape. If, hypothetically, fighting back buys me the time and/or space I need to escape, I still prioritize escape over stopping the attack.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #267 July 24, 2009 QuoteHere I don't quite agree (or I'm reading something slightly different in your reply than what you intended). IMO, the objective at that point is to fight for an opportunity to escape. If, hypothetically, fighting back buys me the time and/or space I need to escape, I still prioritize escape over stopping the attack. To me, escape is what you do before the fight starts. After that point, you really DON'T need to be dividing your attention from the matter at hand. Also, if you couldn't get away BEFORE the fight started, what makes you think you can break away from the middle of the scrum? Conversely, if I've done enough damage that I *CAN* get away, then I have effectively STOPPED him from attacking me, haven't I? Different way of looking at the same situation, methinks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #268 July 24, 2009 QuoteAfter that point, you really DON'T need to be dividing your attention from the matter at hand. The goal is always to escape. If I have to fight, I fight with the goal to escape, not with the goal of neutralizing the attacker. W/r/t self defense, I want to be a survivor, not a hero. QuoteAlso, if you couldn't get away BEFORE the fight started, what makes you think you can break away from the middle of the scrum? It may be as simple as getting the attacker to move out of the way to access space through which to run away. Or, it may be as complicated as neutralizing the threat. Or, it could be somewhere in between. QuoteConversely, if I've done enough damage that I *CAN* get away, then I have effectively STOPPED him from attacking me, haven't I? Yes, if it comes to that. It might not be necessary to do any damage to escape. Of course, every situation is different, and it would be pointless to try and analyze what one might do in every conceivable scenario. QuoteDifferent way of looking at the same situation, methinks. More than likely, yes.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #269 July 24, 2009 I have also seen people in training situations freeze up when their handgun manfunctioned.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #270 July 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteAfter that point, you really DON'T need to be dividing your attention from the matter at hand. The goal is always to escape. If I have to fight, I fight with the goal to escape, not with the goal of neutralizing the attacker. W/r/t self defense, I want to be a survivor, not a hero. My thinking is that self defense is executed in order to stop the attack. At which point escape may be possible. Blunt weapon strike to the head may disorient for a few seconds and allow a headstart, 2 blows may disorient for a minute and allow for escape. The same with gunshots. Once the attack stops, retreat to a safe location and make the phone call.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #271 July 24, 2009 QuoteI have also seen people in training situations freeze up when their handgun manfunctioned. Hmmm. In IDPA pistol shoots, for example, if you have a malfunction with a live round in the chamber that won't clear, there's only so much you're allowed to do, for safety reasons. You can't just go run away and take cover. You have to stand still, and keep the pistol pointed downrange while you clear the jam. If that's the kind of thing you're talking about, I wouldn't call that "freezing up". That's just good safety. In combat, the will to survive will overrule range safety procedures. So I'm not sure that what happens on the range, transfers to combat situations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #272 July 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteI have also seen people in training situations freeze up when their handgun manfunctioned. Hmmm. In IDPA pistol shoots, for example, if you have a malfunction with a live round in the chamber that won't clear, there's only so much you're allowed to do, for safety reasons. You can't just go run away and take cover. You have to stand still, and keep the pistol pointed downrange while you clear the jam. If that's the kind of thing you're talking about, I wouldn't call that "freezing up". That's just good safety. In combat, the will to survive will overrule range safety procedures. So I'm not sure that what happens on the range, transfers to combat situations. I'm talking about training situations where there is outside stress added, and the point of the exercise was weapon clearing drills. the 3rd round in the magazine was a dud (loaded by instructors) to simulate a malfunction. upon hitting this malfunction, the person in question didn't crouch behind the cover they were shooting from, didn't clear the malfunction, and actually had so much going on in their head that they could not speak. "I... uh.. eh.. it... SHIT!!" was about how it went. this was a freezeup. only for a few seconds, but just the same. so certainly, what happens on the range doesnt transfer to combat, but my point was that if someone can freeze up in training they can freeze up in combat even with training to back them up.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #273 July 24, 2009 QuoteI'm talking about training situations where there is outside stress added, and the point of the exercise was weapon clearing drills. the 3rd round in the magazine was a dud (loaded by instructors) to simulate a malfunction. upon hitting this malfunction, the person in question didn't crouch behind the cover they were shooting from, didn't clear the malfunction, and actually had so much going on in their head that they could not speak. "I... uh.. eh.. it... SHIT!!" was about how it went. this was a freezeup. only for a few seconds, but just the same. so certainly, what happens on the range doesnt transfer to combat, but my point was that if someone can freeze up in training they can freeze up in combat even with training to back them up. Got it, and I agree. They should be trained to handle that kind of malfunction instinctively, and it shouldn't require enough thinking to create a pause while they wonder what to do. If the gun doesn't go "bang", cycle the slide and continue. In my high-power rifle matches, we have rapid-fire strings of 10 shots. If the gun malfunctions, we actually stop shooting, because we can then show the malfunction to the range officer, and that earns you an "alibi" string, where you get to re-fire a new 10 rounds for score. But if you try and do immediate action drills to clear the problem, and fail to get all 10 rounds off in time, then you're stuck with whatever score you get from whatever rounds were fired. That encourages you, unless it's a very simple malfunction, to stop and wait. And this is the opposite of what you would want to do in a combat situation. So I guess my point is, procedures can vary based upon the type of training you're doing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #274 July 27, 2009 QuoteIn my high-power rifle matches, we have rapid-fire strings of 10 shots. If the gun malfunctions, we actually stop shooting, because we can then show the malfunction to the range officer, and that earns you an "alibi" string, where you get to re-fire a new 10 rounds for score. But if you try and do immediate action drills to clear the problem, and fail to get all 10 rounds off in time, then you're stuck with whatever score you get from whatever rounds were fired. That encourages you, unless it's a very simple malfunction, to stop and wait. And this is the opposite of what you would want to do in a combat situation. And that is why I don't do those types of matches.... They encourage bad actions."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #275 July 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteIn my high-power rifle matches, we have rapid-fire strings of 10 shots. If the gun malfunctions, we actually stop shooting, because we can then show the malfunction to the range officer, and that earns you an "alibi" string, where you get to re-fire a new 10 rounds for score. But if you try and do immediate action drills to clear the problem, and fail to get all 10 rounds off in time, then you're stuck with whatever score you get from whatever rounds were fired. That encourages you, unless it's a very simple malfunction, to stop and wait. And this is the opposite of what you would want to do in a combat situation. And that is why I don't do those types of matches.... They encourage bad actions. Well... They're only bad if your context is that all shooting matches should teach good self defense skills. I don't go that far. There are plenty of shooting matches done just for fun and sport, that don't have to equate to self-defense skills. That's not the ultimate goal for all types of shooting. But admittedly, in a real self-defense situation, you need to know your immediate action drills, and not let some other learned behavior get in the way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
