Killing in Self Defense - w/o a gun

[artifex]

Hi there,

Good forum,

I'd like to raise the tough issue of killing for self-defense. My self-defense background includes SCARS, Krav Maga and some other "specwar" H2H skills. So, I'm fairly confident that i could kill a man with my bare hands and that it would look worse if I beat him with a stick, gutted him with a knife, broke several bones, etc... The theory behind all of these systems is, in a bad street confrontation where you cannot run, there is usually more than one assailant, whether you know it or not. So, hurt the first one really, REALLY bad and get out of there whilst the others ponder. Techniques like biting the adams apple and ripping out the throat, breaking a neck, etc.. tend to look bad in court and especially to a jury if you have had MA training... Any thoughts or experiences in this arena where your life is at stake but the "carried by 6 judged by 12" is coming into play??

Artifex

------------------
The greatest sword remains in it's scabbard.

[Panther]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by artifex:
Hi there,

Good forum,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right back at cha.

Thanks and Welcome to the forum...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

I'd like to raise the tough issue of killing for self-defense.

It's a serious issue. As martial artists and people who (in general) have already made the decision to defend ourselves and our loved ones should the need arise, it is a decision that, unfortunately, must be made now. No, not to "go out and kill someone", but that should the need ever arise where you or your loved ones are in imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm, will you or will you not do whatever is necessary to stop that threat? While I'm an advocate of self-defense and have made my views known throughout these forums on that issue, the ultimate decision of how far one is willing to go to stop that threat is a very personal one. It's not a decision that anyone can make for anyone else (only offer opinions and both informational as well as moral support for the person's decision), but it's also a decision that can vary based on the knowledge of the aftermath of taking such action. In the aftermath, ultimately no one else will be held accountable for your personal decision and it will come down to each individual having to take personal responsibility for the choices they've made and the actions they take.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

My self-defense background includes SCARS, Krav Maga and some other "specwar" H2H skills. So, I'm fairly confident that i could kill a man with my bare hands and that it would look worse if I beat him with a stick, gutted him with a knife, broke several bones, etc...

In the end, dead is dead. It makes little difference what method is used for reaching that end. Bare hands, knives, chains, baseball bats, automobile, firearm... I would hope that everyone on these forums (and if you don't have the correct mindset on this forum, it will be handled) knows that even though we train for the worst encounter, we are never to instigate and if at all possible avoid these situations.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

The theory behind all of these systems is, in a bad street confrontation where you cannot run, there is usually more than one assailant, whether you know it or not. So, hurt the first one really, REALLY bad and get out of there whilst the others ponder.

Ahem... I hope your goal in any encounter isn't to "hurt the first one really, REALLY bad", but rather to stop the threat of imminent death or grave bodily harm. Anything else would be (and will be considered) criminal.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Techniques like biting the adams apple and ripping out the throat, breaking a neck, etc.. tend to look bad in court and especially to a jury if you have had MA training...

It depends... Any excessive force will be judged harshly in a court of law. (As it should be, IMNSHO...) OTOH, if a "technique" is needed and used to stop the threat of imminent death or grave bodily harm, then it can be justified and may be justified in a court of law.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Any thoughts or experiences in this arena where your life is at stake but the "carried by 6 judged by 12" is coming into play??

Wanting to know how others feel about facing the decision to act or be hurt/killed? Or are you looking for the "been through that crap already... broke the damn mug and tore up the lousy T-shirt for rags, so here's my nasty ninja technique for survival" response?

There are plenty of folks around who can answer either or both... Most folks who've been through the mud (after the initial bout of logorrieha) tend to just get cleaned up, put their life back together and shut up. Although, I've found these forums are an excellent catalyst if someone is "in the rare mood" to discuss something.

[artifex]

Of course my intenet is to stop the aggression and not to "hurt the first guy really REALLY bad" thats what the systems promote, it seems.

as to "Wanting to know how others feel about facing the decision to act or be hurt/killed? Or are you looking for the "been through that crap already... broke the damn mug and tore up the lousy T-shirt for rags, so here's my nasty ninja technique for survival" response?"

How about a little of both? any law enforcement officers in the forum? How should we handle the situation? Flee, stay, what would be the best way for a person to conduct themselves immediately following such an altercation??

What about techniques the "work" in court for self-defense and "work" on the street?

That kind of stuff :-)

Artifex

------------------
The greatest sword remains in it's scabbard.