It is but it is a very interesting question that many people ignore completely - "Give me your wallet" "Here you go" Problem solved "Give me your wallet" "eff you" Problem escalated Now, in a one on one situation it is understandable that the second reaction would be done, and to be blunt it is exactly what I would do. Now make it a 3 on 1...fighting back is very silly so aquiesence is probably best. If the situation is about material goods, give them up If it is about "honour" or being "dissed" walk away. If it is about a spilt pint, give him a fiver and apologise If it is your life or life of your loved ones give it all you've got! But like you acknowledge, each situation is different
Yes, but you should always protect yourself. e.g. A secret service agent will put themselves in the line of fire to protect the president, but that does not mean they want to die.
Either, what is important is that you believe you are doing the right thing. A while back there were some studies done on surviving victims of violent crimes. Those that were most traumatized by the crimes tended to be those that "never thought it could happen to them." As a result of these studies, it was recommended that the first step is to accept that bad things can happen and make a plan of what you are willing to do. For example, if someone comes up to me with a gun and wants my money, they get my money... I'm not going to fight over it. If I survive this, then to me it was my decision. I already decided they get the money so I have a better chance of getting over the trauma and moving on. Opposed to someone that believes they have no control over the matter and are being forced to give up their money and wonders why the rest of their life it happened and why they were too afraid to fight back. I am not fighting back but I'm protecting myself. I'm making it so that if I survive, I can move on with my life. As part of this, people should decide when they will fight back. A vast majority of people that are taken off in a car by force by people intent on doing bad things are not likely to survive. The reason is that criminals with the intent to kill want to take someone off to where there are no witnesses and they can do what they want. You feel you are getting forced into a car, you might decide ahead of time to fight for your life before you are tied up and taken away. Yes you likely may get killed right there, but you got a better chance statistically of getting away while there are still witnesses around. So the training goes... You got other training to say otherwise, like to hear about it.
I've taken a few hits to the body from a drunk mate who didn't know what the hell he was doing. Smothered and calmed him down. Why on earth should I hit him? I got punched in the jaw by a bloke as his 6 or so mates were approaching rapidly, I rolled with it and ran as fast as my springy TKD legs could manage. I once had a guy point out quite aggressively that I was being a twit and he was willing to demonstrate physically why I shouldn't be. He was right, actually, and I apologised and we went back to our beers, me a lot more quietly. Fighting Joe Public is stupid and is generally for losers. I'm not fighting anyone unless I absolutely have to; my kids need a dad and I'm too gorgeous to get my face messed up. Mitch
Why would anyone carry that stuff around? Probably harmless. Not much of a risk for fighting back. :Angel:
Yup. In the security world, they teach you that once you're in such an ambush, you're probably already dead. Hence they tend to stress not ever letting those situations happen.
Here's a link to a story & video clip of a bodyguard trained store clerk using force and offering some good advice afterward. http://www.kare11.com/rss/article/927627/391/Store-clerks-fends-off-robber-with-can-of-tuna "...In the video, you can see Hakim hit the would-be robber on the head, just enough to shake him. The struggle continued and the man assaults Hakim, who thought only about getting that gun so he could get home that night to his six-year-old son. Now healed from his injuries, Hakim hopes this doesn't happen to anyone else. If it was money the robber wanted, Hakim says he would have gladly given it to him without violence. "If he ask him for money, I help him with money. Believe me. I help him," Hakim said. "
I just read between the lines of your statement. In a 2-1 situation you'd think about it, admit it. I know I would. Fat Batman only back downs when there are 3+. Or when he ate too much. Or when mum calls him home early for dinner.
If you had been in a few types of situations, it is not so hard to know when to fight back. I guess this is where "experience" (and not the type of mad physical skills) will be tallied I mean, if you workout in a gym punching a bag for 4-8 hrs a day, this will hardly give enough to whatever type of situation will unfold. I always hear or read where people were bouncers, brawlers, bikers, etc., but it takes more of an ability to not let something escalate. When I had managed a few bar/pub, I had to hire and fire bouncers often because they were too “eager” to use physical force. Thus costing the business a lot of money in legal fees and settlements In short, anyone “can get into a fight”, but it takes as much skill to “not get into one”
Ahem to that. Unfortunately, many of the violent encounters I was engaged in were the direct result of a lack of professionalism from my colleagues. And I did have to go to court once because of it. Though, in that case, it wasn't their fault. We were clearly attacked, by a group, with a lot of witnesses. Regardless, the people you put down nearly always claim some sort of victimization, even when a moment earlier they were charging you screaming, in some cases wielding weapons. Sadly, that little [expletive] got to go free. He and his goons had a history of causing violence in town at numerous establishments, but none of us could remember which ones had actually swung at us and in which order, so the prosecuting attorney (since the charge was only against one of them) couldn't prosecute him. They were a homogeneous group of frat boys who all looked and dressed the same.
Agreed Strange thing about witnesses from either side; The ones with the smaller statue (i.e. even females) usually looked upon a tad more favorably from a judge's view. I had more than my share of actual fights, observation of fights, fights in the business, and legal ramifications resulting
At my school there is a very strict no violence policy, one that punishes the victim as much as the agressor if they fight back. While i realise that many of you aren't in school anymore, this could also apply to the workplace or anywhere else with a strict policy on violence. The point is that your job or schooling or whatever it is, is not worth risking just to beat the snot out of that annoying co-worker or peer. Sometimes it's better just to talk it out, or even talk to someone in authority (the police for example) rather than fight.
I have personally witnessed a judge make snap decisions based on "feelings" about court proceedings in cases of reported violence, refusing to look at ANY paperwork. My friends and coworkers have had similar experiences. They are frequently overworked, under-educated, and lazy. That is something the "theories" about the legality of use of force laws here frequently neglect to mention.
