Humane self defense
Returning to an old preoccupation; the problem of "amber light" situations in which a skilled fighter must use some degree of physical force, but without inflicting damage or injury.
These scenarios can range from physically intervening to prevent a disturbed individual from harming themselves or others, to an adult security guard restraining a panicked teenage shoplifter, to defending yourself against an out-of-control loved one (let's say your mother). In each case you may be ethically, legally, socially and/or professionally obliged to physically counter violence with humane, minimal force/injury methods.
Questions such as "but what if they pull a knife?" are to be considered moot; we assume that they don't, or that if they did the light would change from amber to green if necessary.
These low-medium threat situations are rarely considered in the self defense context but IMO are worthy of some discussion.
I worked as a crisis interventionist, and as a crisis intervention instructor in juvenile critical detention for 8 years. The population was sex offenders with either MR or a psych diagnosis.
The two real keys in these situations are getting the situation moved away from the larger population so that you do not get stomped, and then wrapping up the target and letting them burn themselves out.
Technique wise, the approved NYS system is a great one for keeping the kids safe, but reduces you to a punching bag unless you have either the numbers or the size advantage (and at 5'11" 207lbs I was often out sized). Joint manipulation is out of the question, and the two approved takedowns were the "gravity step" two man face up lowering, and the "sit slide" for one man where you step backward while bear hugging them and then slide them to the ground before transitioning to the "protective hold".
I'm familiar with some physical intervention training systems, but not with NYS (New York State?). Does it address purely defensive skills (striking defenses, breaking holds) as well as leverage takedowns and restraints? Is the training realistic?
1. .standing side neck subission. Osoto gari. Side mount (seated on arse) scarf hold.
2. get a friend or two and grab their arms nuber three grabs their body number 4 grabs their legs.
3. Overraps from the back and then hook one arm through and lock both their arms with yours (hard to explain I did see a video of it once I will try to find it)
It deals with defense, but it is the kind of BS that only a Phd at Cornell University (where the curriculum was developed) who had never been in an actual fight, would put into a program.
Example: for strike defense you are supposed to raise your hands up and apart about eye level and just about shoulder width apart, and then when the giant looping punch (because everybody knows that is the only punch that really happens) comes at you you turn you entire body to block the punch with both arms.
Another example: against a rear choke, you are supposed to grab the choking arm with both hands step behind the choker, and then bend down while pushing the choking arm off of your neck and head, and step away (the "step away" being the ending move of all of the static single attack based defenses).
My favorite of the techniques taught was the bite defense. First, ask them to stop biting you. Second, pinch their nose shut and then they will have to let go of the bite to breath. Third, "step away".
DdlR, this is an essential question, and I think you've called it out correctly. Most life problems requiring restraint, or other use of force, fall into your cited low-to-medium threat situations, and are covered by legal and ethical considerations which constrains what a person can legitimately do.
First, everyone has an opinion. Hopefully that opinion has been formed by relevant training and experience. Some times, just living qualifies, but in this topic you'd probably hope for something in addition to just having some life experience.
My perspectives are formed by the following shaping training and experience. I did a lot of physical security work (night watchman to use a classical term) for a decade while working through school, shore patrol (in an earlier era), police reserve training (earlier era), and now (as an old guy) I am a volunteer in a civil defense unit. This is all less-than-lethal work, and constrained by law.
I am in the initial phase of developing a short instructional for volunteers. The purpose of the instruction is to help others get the basic principles of physical security, to include conflict avoidance and de-escalation (talk people down) and basic use-of-force principles at the less-than-lethal level for the maintenance of good order.
A lot of bravado talk takes place, but it reflects an unrealistic appreciation for context. I hope to provide some better boundaries of expectation, and provide simple tools to cover basic problems. Some scenario-driven practice will then follow to reinforce the instruction.
If someone gets really out of control in a relief shelter, it would create undo stress and chaos.
I am thankful you brought this topic up, and will look forward to the replies. If people can provide sources for follow-up study or instructional aides, it would be appreciated.
Sounds pretty good. We can probably only assume backup in professional situations, where a small team has trained in team takedowns. I can visualize #3 but if you could find video it might be useful for further discussion.
Originally Posted by gregaquaman
Thanks - that also goes some way towards answering the "realism" question.
Originally Posted by MikeRC
It is funny I origionally found #3 on youtube somwhere but I am stuffed if I can find it again
Originally Posted by DdlR
It is my official girl lock because I am not touching their boobies
I'm in a similar place, but in my case thinking about reviving a program I set up decades ago.
Originally Posted by mrtnira