Should I Run Out And Buy A Gun?

By Matthew Schafer

Copyright 2008, All Rights Reserved

I get a lot of questions from people about whether or not they should buy a gun for self-defense, and I also get asked every now and then why gun owners should take self-defense classes because, after all, they have guns. My answer to these people is that I believe that guns are great tools, I am a big believer in owning a gun, and I own guns myself, however, buying a gun doesn't mean that you no longer have to train in basic self-defense skills.

Often people want to use guns as an excuse to get out of training. Some people believe that guns are the most effective form of self-defense so if you own one you don't have to waist time with "lesser" methods such as hand-to-hand combat. The truth is that this form of reasoning is extremely flawed and incredibly dangerous.

A gun is an absolutely great self-defense tool but it is only a tool. What determines whether someone can use a gun to effectively defend themselves in a violent situation is first and foremost the individual's level of training and competency with the weapon. Even then the gun just serves as an extension of the individual's training and preparation. It is always the individual that succeeds or fails, or in this case lives or dies, and not the tool that they have in their hand.

Gun enthusiasts tend to not agree with my point of view, but I, a gun enthusiast myself, believe that they focus too much on their tool. Some people actively train with and carry their guns for the purpose of self-defense and believe that that alone will keep them safe and while I have nothing but respect for these people I firmly believe that they are not any safer than an unarmed self-defense practitioner. The reason for this is that focusing on any self-defense tool is missing the point of self-defense entirely.

The point of self-defense is to first notice and avoid potential danger, second to de-escalate and escape danger, and third to neutralize attackers through bodily injury. If someone attacks you, you want to take as much force as you can possibly get, drive that force through the weakest areas of their body, and then repeat as necessary. This will result in the temporary or permanent destruction of a bodily function or structure which will cause the attacker to be physically unable to continue their attack. When you are attacked it doesn't matter how all this is accomplished, it only matters that it is accomplished. It matters not whether the thing that generates the force and drives it into the vulnerable areas of their body is a fist, foot, baseball bat, rock, golf club, axe, a gun, a rifle, a grenade, etc. It doesn't matter what punctures a lung or blows out a knee, all that matters is that the lung gets punctured or that the knee gets blown out, after all the lung or knee won't know the difference between the various methods of delivery.

The reason that guns are a great self-defense tool is firstly because they create fear and hesitation in the other individual, and secondly, and far more importantly, they have the ability to punch holes through the person's body which can result in a wide variety of bodily dysfunctions, impairments, structural failures, and possibly death. Add to that that guns can do this from a far greater range then you can with other weapons and they can do it effectively and fairly dependably. However, as great and effective as guns are you can get the same, or comparable, results with other non-projectile weapons such as your body. When a bullet enters someone's body it can puncture organs, fracture bones, tear nerves and cartilage, or rip joints but you can get the same result yourself by throwing someone down and stomping on them. The only difference is that the bullet can do it faster, with less effort, and from a greater distance.

The main problem with focusing on any weapon or self-defense device, whether it be a gun, knife, pepper spray, alarm, whistle, or any other, can be found in what we refer to as the "rule of thumb". The rule of thumb states that when you are attacked you use whatever is in your hands at the time to defend yourself. If you have a cell phone in your hand you can use your cell phone, if you have your car keys in your hands you can use your keys, and if your hands are empty you use your bare hands. It also means that if a weapon isn't in your hands when a violent situation starts you should forget about using it, at least for the time being. How many people have been beaten, raped, or killed because an attacker confronted them and instead of just defending themselves from the attack they spent their time trying to get at a weapon that they had in their pocket or purse? If you have pepper spray in your hand and you're attacked then by all means use your pepper spray, but if you have pepper spray in your pocket and you're attacked you should forget about your pepper spray and just defend yourself. Violence happens extremely fast and you can't waist time by trying to get at the gun that is on your hip, if you do then you could be unconscious or fatally injured by the time you have it half way out of the holster.

People who are really into weapons usually brainwash themselves into believing that they need their weapon in order to be dangerous or effective in a self-defense situation. You need to remember that self-defense is all about causing injuries and although labor saving devices are nice, you don't need any weapon other than your body to cause them. Think about it, if you have a gun in a holster on your hip covered by two layers of clothing and someone comes up to you, cocks their right fist, and throws a punch at you, does it make more sense to try to pull up your clothing, grab your gun, pull it out of the holster, disengage the safety, point it at your target, pull the trigger, and then hope the gun goes off (it very well may jam or under duress you may not have disengaged the safety or chambered a round), hope the bullet hits the attacker, and hope that the attacker stops his attack when he gets shot, or to simply forget about the gun, step in and hit your attacker in the chin with your palm which will knock him back and could very well knock him out, and then when you have a moment or two to think, get your gun out?

If someone attacks you and you don't have a weapon already in your hand, you should forget about it. Criminals attack in such a manner that you can't waist time messing around with a weapon. When a criminal attacks they use the same method employed by police SWAT teams and special operations units. That method is called "Speed, Surprise, and Violence of Action". A soldier or SWAT team member can talk to you at length about this method and while a criminal most likely will not be able to give you the terms, they can definitely talk to you about the general process. Both the police officer, soldier, and criminal try to strike their target with such speed that their target won't have time to react, with surprise so their target will not have the ability to prepare of plan, and with such violence that the target will go into a defensive state of shock and not have the ability to react. This method has proven to be so effective and reliable that it is used by every tactical unit in the world. This being so, you can see why when you're attacked you don't have time to dick around trying to grab a tool.

Interestingly, when it comes to combat in close quarters many special operations units teach, and I agree totally with this, that it is much easier to take your opponent's weapon and use it on them than it is to use your own weapon. For example, if you were going through a building with your handgun and you turned a corner and suddenly you were standing next to an attacker who also had his gun out, would it make more sense for both of you to start shooting and let bullets fly everywhere, or to just move into your attacker and control his weapon, take it away, and shoot him with it? If both of you were to start shooting then both of you could end up dead. Plus, in such close quarters it is actually very hard, even for experienced soldiers, to place a shot on their opponent that can stop them. Unless the bullet fractures a bone, tears a joint, or hits a nerve it won't instantly stop someone, even if you shoot someone in the heart and their heart explodes they will still have about 15 seconds left of conscious and controlled movement. Personally even though I own a gun I don't carry it because if I want to shoot my attacker I'll take their gun away and shoot them with that.

So to gun owners I tell them that they need to train in basic self-defense skills because there is a very good chance that they won't be able to get to their guns under duress, after all police officers are heavily trained to use their guns, they wear them out in the open so they don't have any clothes encumbering themselves from getting at them, and they use quick release holsters to aid in their ability to get their guns quickly, and yet officers are killed all the time with their guns still in their holsters.

To people who are interested in buying a gun for self-defense I tell them to sit down and decide whether or not they can actually shoot someone. If they feel that they can't or if they're not sure I tell then I wouldn't recommend it. If you have a gun but don't have the mental ability to pull the trigger and take someone's life when you need to then the only thing that will happen is that the criminal will now have a brand new gun and you'll be far worse off. If they can honestly say that they can pull the trigger when they need to, I then tell them that as long as they realize the weapons limitations, receive training in combat shooting, and actively practice with it, it is a great tool. Then I warn them about focusing on it too much and feeling overconfident because they have it, after all just because you have a gun doesn't mean that your attacker can't take it away from you and use it on you.

If you're interested in learning to defend yourself don't rush out and buying a gun. To truly be able to defend yourself you have to be more than a one-trick-pony. If you are interested in defending yourself the first and foremost thing you have to do is make the conscious decision to take responsibility for your own safety. Until you make that decision and accept that commitment you won't be truly mentally prepared.

The next step is to educate yourself. You need to learn who is most likely to attack you and how they will do it. You need to learn what makes people attack, how criminals think, how they commit their crimes, how they choose their victims, how to spot them, what to do if you spot them, and how to stop them just to name a few. After you learn that you need to learn awareness techniques that will allow you to spot potential criminals. This can't be stressed enough: if you're not being aware of your surroundings and looking for criminals you most likely won't spot them and there will be very little anyone can do for you.

After that you need to learn techniques for de-escalating potentially violent situations like arguments and aggressive confrontations. About 80% of all assaults happen during or just after arguments so if you can de-escalate them you remove about 80% of your threats right there. If you don't know these things you most likely won't have the opportunity to use any self-defense technique let alone your shiny new gun (to this end I would highly recommend getting the book Surviving Violence which teaches you all these things. To get it go to www.myspace.com/selfprotection).

Next you need to take a reliable course in self-defense. To be really rounded out you need to be able to defend yourself from basic grabs, holds, punches, kicks, knives, clubs, firearms, and multiple attackers, but any amount of learning will help you survive. An attacker isn't going to stand back, put their arms up, and fight you like a boxer; instead they will most likely rush you and be on you like an angry pit-bull repeatedly overwhelming you with punches, pushes, and foul language. When this happens you need to have the ability to use your own body and bodyweight to cause severe and debilitating injuries to them.

After that you need to learn to use improvised weapons. Improvised weapons are ordinary items that can be used to cause injuries; these include books, bags, ink pens, magazines, hairspray, keys, combs, dirt and sand, and pretty much any other item. For the ordinary citizen knowing how to use improvised weapons is far more important than traditional weapons because, as stated in the "rule of thumb", you are far more likely to have these items in your hands when violence happens to you. Unless your well trained and prepared you probably won't have pepper spray in your hands, and there is a very small chance that someone will attack you while you're holding a gun, but you just may have an ink pen in your hand.

After you learn improvised weapons you should learn to use personal weapons. Personal weapons are ready made devices designed and sold for the purpose of self-defense. These items include pepper spray, tactical flashlights, stun guns, retractable batons, personal alarms, knives, and others. I suggest learning to use these before you learn to use guns because there are a lot of places that you can't take guns but you can take pepper spray. You can't take a gun on a plane or into various foreign countries but you can take an ink pen or a tactical flashlight (a tactical flashlight is a small flashlight that shoots a high intensity light that blinds an individual and gives you the opportunity to run away or close distance to them and cause injuries). Most states have laws against various personal weapons so you need to check with your individual state, but simple improvised weapons are legal everywhere.

When all this is done only then do I recommend learning to use firearms BUT I don't recommend buying one just yet. Guns are expensive and it is easy to buy the wrong one. You need to first go to a range and spend some time shooting various guns to see if a gun is right for you. Next you need to decide on exactly how you want to use the gun (do you want to carry the gun or leave it home just for home defense) and speak with a knowledgeable dealer and/or instructor. Most gun dealers are happy to answer your questions and help you select the right gun.

Now that you have a gun you need to get lots and lots of training. Go to your local range or gun store and ask about taking a course to get your CCP (concealed carry permit) and take a course in combat shooting or defensive shooting. Standing in place and shooting a target at the range is one thing but pulling a gun out and shooting an actual person who is trying to seriously injure or kill you is another. You need to learn how to use your gun when you're under attack and actively practice, practice, practice. If you expect to use your gun to defend yourself you need to access your gun underneath your clothing, pull it, disengage the safeties, chamber a round if not already done, point it at your attacker, align the sites with your target, and press the trigger until the gun goes off which will take a good 3 to 6 seconds even for an experienced shooter while all your attacker needs to do is hit, shoot, or stab you which could only take a second.

Guns are great tools and huge responsibilities and only a person truly committed to their own safety should own one otherwise it will probably end up hurting someone or falling into the wrong hands.

The last thing I'll say about guns are that guns are not for self-defense! If you're planning on buying a gun to defend yourself I suggest you don't get one. Used correctly there are only two purposes that guns serve, and those are for killing someone and to practicing killing someone. Having a gun on your hip doesn't keep you safe, all it allows you to do is to kill someone that is trying to hurt you. Guns are a tool for killing and if you carry one it should only be with the intent of killing a criminal otherwise there's a good chance are that when you need to use it you'll fail to pull it, or if you succeed in pulling it there is a good chance that you'll use it to intimidate your attacker instead of lining up the sights and pulling the trigger. This lack of preparedness and failure to properly use the weapon is the reason that over 90% of people who are shot in their own homes are shot with their own guns.

Is it true that most fights end up on the ground?

Yes and no. While it is true that pretty much every fight or violent assault ends up with one or more people lying on the ground, usually unconscious or a least badly beaten, it is not true that most fights turn into wrestling matches.

The statistic that 95% of all fights go to the ground is actually a misquoted finding made in a study preformed by the Los Angels Police Department. They did a study that stated that when they were arresting a suspect and the suspect resisted arrest, 95% of the time they had to put the suspect on the ground in order to cuff them. Not quite the same thing is it?

This false statistics has been spread by the sport fighting community as a sales tactic. By telling everyone that they need to learn to wrestle because "95% of all fights end up on the ground" they enroll more students and of course sell more merchandise such as instructional video tapes and special martial arts uniforms and clothing that won't rip when you wrestle.

What is true is that about 90% of fights and violent assaults last about 5 seconds, start with a right hook, and end when the other guy eats that punch and falls down and bounces his head off the ground. Quite often the trauma caused by the person hitting their head on the ground causes loss of memory , concussions, brain damage, coma, and even death.

The only times real fights or violent assaults end up on the ground is when both people slip and fall, and that's usually caused by them having poor balance.

Another thing that is true is that when people die in fights and violent assaults its quite often because they did go to the ground. Either they slipped and fell or they decided to go to the ground and wrestle and ended up with the other guy, or other guys, just stomping and kicking them until they stopped moving.

Going to the ground or wrestling in a real fight or violent encounter is the last thing that you want to do because when you're on the ground you can only deal with one person at a time. There is a saying that you never know how many people you're fighting until you're fighting them all. You might think you're fighting just one guy, but he may have a few friends hanging around and if he starts to lose they might all jump in to help.

A common tactic that gangs use, both to victimize people and as an initiation rite, is called "the sacrificial lamb". In this technique a group of hoodlums send one person out to confront someone, sometimes a police officer. The person's job it to try to grab a hold of the person and to get him to either grapple standing up or wrestle on the ground. If the sacrificial lamb succeeds in getting the guy to grapple or wrestle then everyone will jump out and they will all attack their victim at once. If the sacrificial lamb isn't successful then he or she is left to fiend for themselves. If you are the intended victim and you fall for the sacrificial lamb and end up trying to put them in a hold or wrestle them on the ground you could be eating shoe leather.

Wrestling is a great sport but it is only appropriate for sport fighting. If you know real self defense techniques then you wouldn't waist your time with wrestling anyway.

Is board breaking really all that great?

By Matthew Schafer
Copyright 2007


When people learn that you practice martial arts they generally ask the same questions and the same comments start. Now I don't really mind when someone who knows nothing about the martial arts starts going on about this or that; what really gets me is when someone who studies, or thinks they study, the martial arts starts rambling asinine comments and questions. This is one of the main reasons I stopped reading "Black Belt" and other martial art magazines.

What got me this time is the propaganda promoted by the martial arts that are into breaking boards, and the people who spout scientific formulas for determining how hard you punch and kick.

These two issues may seem unrelated to the untrained eye but the all make they same mistakes.

First you have the board breaking community which states that board breaking is essential to learning martial arts and that it's a great tool for teaching you how to strike. They also say that since it takes about 8lbs of pressure to break a typical pine board and most of the bones in the body can also be broken with only 8lbs of pressure that board breaking is a "must" if you want to cause "real damage" to the body. The infamous Ashida Kim stated that since it takes 8lbs of pressure to break most bones that you only need to be able to strike with 8lbs of pressure.

Then you have the various formulas people come up with for determining how much force you are punching and kicking with. They add in various numbers and say that someone with X amount of weight who can strike with Y amount of speed can cause M amount of damage to the body when they hit it. If you do a search on the internet you can find all kinds of pages with these formulas on it.

What both of these groups fail to consider is that there is NO real correlation between hitting a board and hitting the human body. You see, a board is brittle and when you hit it, it resists and by resisting it breaks. The human body of the other hand is more like hitting a water balloon. The soft tissues of the body yield to the force and bend and move rather than break.

Firstly, simple Newtonian Physics states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So let's say that someone is holding a board for me to break. What is the first thing that I do? I check the board holder's stance because if they're not holding it right the board won't break. Why? If his stance isn't strong enough, isn't physically and geometrically sound, when I hit the board he will yield and the board won't break. My force hits the board and the board holder gets knocked backwards and the force dissipates. If he holds the board correctly the force isn't dissipated by his backward movement and the board, which is brittle and resists, breaks.

There are quite a few lessons to be taken away from this scenario. Consider that the board holder has to stand in a certain way to withstand the force of the blow. Now when you hit a person for real how often will they be standing in a manner to resist your force? Probably never. Chances are they will be standing naturally or they will be up on their toes. In other words, if you walk up to someone and hit them you will knock them backwards simply because they won't be standing correctly to resist the force.

If I punch that board and break it, and then the board holder puts the pieces down and walks towards me and I punch him in the ribs in the exact same manner that I punched the board, he will move backwards and the force will largely dissipate without a break occurring. If I transfer X amount of force with my punch he will cause a large portion to dissipate by moving backwards which will take force away from the ribs. Then if my balance is off and I move backwards too even more force will dissipate instead of going into the ribs.

Next we have to consider the fact that the body responds to trauma by moving the effected area away from the negative stimulus. In the same way that my hand quickly jerks backwards when I touch a hot pan, my body will jerk my ribs backwards if they are hit. The way my body does this is by rotating the injured area away from the negative stimulus, a fist, and moving backwards. You can see this by going up to someone and forcefully poking them in the ribs with your thumb. What will they do? They will bend foreword at the ribs, the point of trauma, rotate that side of the body backwards, and they will cover that area with their hands while taking a small step back. The harder you poke them the more profound the reaction. It should also be noted that the step backwards is an involuntary reaction meant to move the ribs away from the poke and not caused by the force of the impact.

We also have to take into consideration the fact that the body is soft and pliable. Not only does the force of the punch knock the "bad guy" backwards and not only does his body execute a series on involuntary reactions meant to jerk the injured area away from my fist, all of which causes the force to dissipate, but his body actually compresses. That's right! The human body can actually compress about 3 inches before it has to break. So the ribs will actually bend away from my fist and sink into the organs. Much like the reed that weathers the storm by bending and being supple while the mighty oak is broken because it resisted the wind.

If you have ever actually hit someone in the body you have felt your hand sink into them without anything breaking. The body is very soft and will compress about 3 inches before having to break.

So if I hit someone in the ribs and the force of my blow knocks him backwards, he performs involuntary movements to jerk the ribs away from my fist by rotating, bending, and stepping, and then the rib actually compresses rather than breaks, then how is hitting a board anything like hitting the human body? Why do people put such faith in these scientific formulas that, while they are somewhat on track and scientifically sound, ignore the human element? Would you apply the same force equations to driving a truck into a brick wall as you would for driving it into a jello? No. The wall resists, like the board, and the jello yields, like the human body.

That's one of the main reasons why people don't get the "correct" reactions when they hit another person. Everyone is training to break boards and hit heavy bags and ignoring the fact that since the body will yield to dissipate the force you have to hit it harder and penetrate further.

Do You Really Have To Be In Shape In Order To Defend Yourself?

By Matthew Schafer

Copyright 2008, All Rights Reserved

My articles are published in several martial arts publications and they are generally seen as somewhat controversial. I believe that is just because I see things a little differently than most people do in that I tend to focus on the context of martial arts as opposed to the content. The context of the martial arts is simply that someone is trying to cause serious injury or death to you and you intend to prevent them by causing serious injury or death to them first; the content is simply how you get that done. The content of the martial arts include all your punches, kicks, blocks, throws, disarms, and every other technique and weapon in the martial art arsenal, and that is where most people tend to keep their focus.

Tae Kwon Do is a fine example of this; I studied Tae Kwon Do for about 3 years and, despite that I found it to be a lot of fun, I was disappointed in that it was nothing more than a library of kicking techniques and forms. To get my black belt I had to learn so many punches, so many kicks, so many hand techniques, so many stances, so many forms, spar so many people, and break so many boards (and also write so many checks) and voila...I am now a black belt in Tae Kwon Do. In the end I knew a lot of techniques but I still didn't know how to use them. My training had been 100% content (how you get things done) and 0% context (learning how to use violence to cause injuries). By ignoring the context of the martial arts that Tae Kwon Do school that I attended was cranking out black belts that had no idea what the realities of violence and injury are and therefore stand a very poor chance in actually defending themselves from a real attack.

I understand why people don't focus on the context of the martial arts and that is because 1.) people don't understand the context, 2.) people are happy with the content and don't care about the context, and 3.) the context can be damn scary and people don't want to acknowledge it. The content of martial arts is a lot of fun and the reality of the context is not so much, but still is has to be addressed if you ever want to be able to defend yourself. One of the great things about the context is that it is really easy! The content of the martial arts can be very complicated and hard (I never could do a jump spinning hook kick) but the context is causing injuries to people and that is incredibly simple.

Causing injuries to people is so simple that anyone with a fairly functional use of their body can do it. So, here comes the big question...do you have to be in shape in order to defend yourself? The answer is both yes and no and depends on the context of the defense. If I want to step into a ring and compete with someone to find out who is better then I'd better be in shape if I want to win, but if I'm walking down the street and some punk sticks a gun in my face it really doesn't matter what condition I'm in because I’m not going to get into a boxing match with my attacker; so the answer is no you don't have to be in shape.

I understand that that flies in the face of what every single other martial arts instructor will tell you, in fact in a recent issue of Black Belt Magazine noted security expert Kelly McCann, aka Jim Grover, stated, "It's laughable when people who are completely out of shape think they can defend themselves". While I respect his opinion because he is a very competent man, he and the majority of other instructors are focusing on the content and competition. They are in a paradigm where the confrontation starts with two people facing each other in fighting stances but that's called competition.

I've stated this many times before in my articles and in my classes, if you take an honest look at violence, if you look at the data compiled by the FBI, footage of attacks in prison, and security camera footage of real crimes being committed you'll see that no where are fighting stances used. If you are in a competition like a tournament, sparring in a dojo, boxing, mma, or "stepping outside" to see who is tougher then you will most likely start by sparring off in fighting stances; but in an actual instance of criminal violence the criminal is not going to square off with you and duke it out, they are going to walk up to you and just attack, then if things don't go their way they'll most likely run for safety.

If I'm squaring off with somebody and I'm going to attack and defend and he's going to do the same then it would benefit us to be in top condition as the fight may last a minute or even a few depending on our ability and what the rules will allow, but real violence, a real fight, generally lasts less than 10 seconds and the attacker seldom does anything defensive but run away if he gets hurt. An attacker who wants to punch you will just walk up to you and swing and his focus will be on taking you by surprise and injuring you and not on defending himself. A real criminal will stand there and attack you; he won't be in a fighting stance, he won't be bobbing and weaving, he won’t be dancing on his toes, he won't be trying to block your blows or counter you, he'll just be standing there attacking you and he'll run away if he gets scared or hurt.

Real violence is much, much, much simpler than the martial arts make it. If someone is actually attacking you he or she will be wide open the entire time and all you have to do is step in and cause an injury. For example, let's say that a criminal is stalking you and he intends to stab you repeatedly and then rob you. He walks up to you and says, "Excuse me, do you have the time?", so you stop and look down at your watch as gets closer and pulls his knife. Out of the corner of your eye you just happen to see the blade come out of his pocket as you begin to read your watch, so what do you do? Do you step into a fighting stance and try to counter? No, by the time your hands are up you'll have a knife inside you. Instead all you have to do is immediately take a big step into him and punch him in the throat. He's going to be just standing there getting ready to stab you so he'll be completely open, and as soon as you drive your bodyweight into his throat he won't be able to stab you because he'll be traveling backwards from the force of your blow.

Most people, even seasoned military trainers, get competition and actual violence mixed up. If you're going to compete with someone then you better be following a strict diet, doing your pushups, and dong some intensive cardio a few times a week. However, if you are going to injure a criminal who is standing right in front of you completely wide open in an altercation that is going to last 10 seconds or less, then all that exercise really is optional. Some of the best students I've had were overweight or even obese, as they had so much bodyweight they could easily end a confrontation with a single blow.

Now please don't think that I'm trying to say that you can ignore your physical health because being in shape will only benefit you. Also let’s not forget the value of being able to run away from danger when you need to. The only point I'm trying to make with this article is that being in shape is a great thing but if all you want to do is be able to defend yourself then you don't need to run three miles a day.

Karate's Dirty Little Secret

by Matthew Schafer

Copyright 2006, All Rights Reserved

Most people are unaware of this little fact, but Karate, and the other martial arts as well, do in fact have a dirty little secret that they try to hide from the public. I first became aware of this little secret when I was a teenager attending classes at my local Taekwondo school. I remember I had just finished a class and was tired and sweaty from all the punches, kicks, blocks, and forms when my instructor said something that shocked me. She said, "Next weekend we're having a self defense class and we'd like you all to attend. If anyone is interested the cost is $30."

To say that this confused me is an understatement. If I'm taking martial art lessons then why would I have to take a self defense class? Let alone pay extra for it? I figured that it was probably just a special class for beginners but I was wrong. When I went to the class I looked around and I did see beginners, but the majority or the participants were black belts, and not just from my school but from several other schools in the area. My surprise was increased when I saw that the instructor for this class was not our instructor, and what he taught was not Taekwondo. This "new" instructor that I had never seen before was teaching pressure points, leverages, and other things that I knew were not taught at our school.

This class was a big eye opener for me and it taught me two things. First, it showed me the difference between an "art" and "self defense". What we were learning at our school was the "art" of Taekwondo. We were learning to do big fancy kicks that were supposed to be head high, or higher for some reason, and all kinds of fancy punches, blocks, and forms. In contrast, during the self defense class we were taught totally different things like kicks to the knees, finger jabs to the eyes, and ways to get out of various holds. I learned that day that there are certain things that you do when training in a martial arts school, and quite different things that you do when someone is trying to take your life.

The other thing that I learned, the dirty little secret that martial art schools try to hide from the public, is that when it comes to learning to defend yourselves, black belts have to take self defense classes just like everyone else. Sure, they're not always called self defense classes but that is exactly what they are. Today I am a self defense instructor and the majority of my clients are martial arts schools. Martial art schools in areas all over the state contact me and pay me to come to their schools and teach classes on self defense, knife defenses, gun disarming, groundfighting, and defending against multiple opponents.

But here is the ten thousand dollar question...why do people with black belts have to take self defense classes? Isn't a black belt supposed to know how to defend themselves? After all, a black belt is someone proficient in martial arts and martial arts are self defense, aren't they? The simple answer is not typically. The truth is that most martial arts schools really don't teach anything other than punching and kicking techniques, and most black belts aren't taught anything other than how to throw punches and kicks. Some schools do teach knife defenses, some teach knife defenses but not gun defenses, and some teach gun defense but not knife defenses and so on.

The truth is that regardless of whether a particular school may teach an "art" or teach with more of a focus on self defense techniques, or whether they teach knife defense or not, if you're actually talking about self defense then all your fighting techniques are secondary. Why? Because if you try to "fight" with a real violent criminal you will lose. Real criminals set things up so you never have the opportunity to fight back. First, they set you up so that when they attack you, you will be trapped. Second, criminals don't stand there and trade punches with you like in a sparring session, instead they rely on sucker punches and surprise attacks so that you'll never see the attack coming, and as soon as they strike they try to completely overwhelm you. Therefore, it doesn't matter if you are a 7th degree black belt, or how good your spin hook kick is, because if an experienced criminal attacks you, very seldom you will never see it coming.

According to statistics, very few people who are attacked every actually see the attack. Sure, they might know that they are getting repeatedly punched in the head while it happens but very seldom do they ever see the attack coming, and while its happening they're too busy reacting to the attack to even look at their attacker. Also, around 97% of stabbing victims report that they never saw the knife that stabbed them. Most victims thought that they had just been punched really hard and they didn't know that they had been stabbed until after the attack. So if criminals like to attack by surprise and most victims never actually see the punch or the knife that injures them, how are you supposed to "fight" off a criminal?

The truth is that you can't. Since you probably won't be able to see the attack that is used on you the only thing you can actually do is try to see the criminals and recognize them before they strike. Very seldom does a criminal just jump out and attack a random person; what they do do is go to a place where people are, look around, size everyone up and look for specific vulnerabilities, then carefully pick their target, and then wait for the perfect opportunity to strike. Usually they will follow you until you come to a secluded area or an area that provides concealment, like a parked car or tree, and once you get there they surprise you from behind. Or they may learn your rountine and position themselves along your regular route. For example, if you take a walk around the block every morning, they might learn your rountine, show up early, and be waiting for you behind a tree.

If you want to be able to have any chance at defending yourself you have to be able to look around you and detect the criminals that are sizing you up. Once you detect them you have to know what signals to give them that show them that you don't have the vulnerabilities that they are looking for. Only after you learn how criminals think, how they pick their targets, what vulnerabilites they are looking for, and how they commit their crimes can you then start to think about using self defense techniques.

Even if you are doing everything correctly you can still be taken by surprise. In the same way that most victims never actually see the attack that got them, most real self defense situations will actually start with you being grabbed, hit, stabbed, or shot. The attack may actually start with you being struck in the back of the head and being knocked half unconscious, then falling face first onto the floor and breaking your nose. Even if you do do everything right the first sign you may get that it is time to defend yourself may come while you are on the ground, face covered in blood, with someone standing over you. Unfortunately that is quite realistic.

The reason that even people with black belts have to take self defense classes is that very few martial arts schools know or teach all these things. Like I stated above, the vast majority of martial arts educations consists of punching and kicking techniques and little more. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to make the martial arts look bad because I actually love the martial arts, I'm just stating the truth. When I go to teach a self defense class for a room full of black belts its quite obvious that they have never been taught about any of this.

One thing that I do in almost every class is demostrate the violence of a real knife attack with my assistant instructor as he does a common knife defense technique. Everyone is expecting me to dance around and try to cut him, with a rubber knife of course, but you should see the sheer terror in their eyes when instead I run over to him and start violently "punching" the knife into his torso before he can even do his technique. Then after I knock him on the ground I continue to violently stab him as he trys to control the knife. All in all the demonstration is about 15 seconds long and I stab my partner, who is actually trying to stop me with his technique, at least 10 to 15 times. After the demonstration I turn back to my class and watch their faces go from a look of sheer horror to uneasiness because they honestly don't know if the could do any better. This demonstration is a great tool for showing people the actual violence involved in a real attack.

I know several people who make a very good living by giving self defense classes to martial art schools. I even know a guy who makes a good living by teaching the exact same 3 night self defense course just once a month, and every single month his class is full and according to him almost every single student is a black belt. The only techniques he teaches are a poke to the eye and a kick to the knee, but the reason that black belts, capable of far more advanced techniques, show up for his classes is because he actually teaches HOW to use the techniques against a violent attacker.

The point I'm trying to make here is not that the martial arts are ineffective because they are actually very effective. The only problem that the martial arts have is that they spend all their time teaching you how to DO techniques rather then what it takes to actually USE the techniques.

The point I am trying to make is that if you are honestly looking to defend yourself don't immediately rush out to a martial arts school. Instead look around for a self defense class first. Check with your police department, your yellow pages, your local parks and recreation department, and local gyms and you probably can find a self defense class in your area.

Also, be very weary of self defense classes offered by martial arts schools because I can tell you as a martial arts instructor myself, most instructors look a giving self defense classes as just a way of trying to get you to enroll as a student in their school. Also add the fact that if the instructor has no other self defense education other than his karate training he or she is probably not going to be able to teach you all the things I listed above that you need to know about criminal behavior.

If all you want to do is learn to defend yourself I recommend finding a self defense class with an instructor that only teaches self defense classes and doesn't also teach martial arts, because if he or she does they might only be offering classes as a marketing tool. I also recommend that you take one or two self defense classes before you consider joining a martial arts school to learn self defense. That should help you be able to distinguish the difference between and "art" and dealing with "real violence".

So if you are considering learning to defend yourself please don't rush out to your local martial arts school. Often the instructor at the self defense class will be more educated about real self defense then a martial arts instructor, its probably cheaper than attending a martial arts school, and if you take a self defense class you just might end up sitting next to your local martial arts instructor anyway.

What’s Wrong with The Martial Arts?

By Matthew Schafer

Copyright 2007, All Rights Reserved

If you’ve studied martial arts for any length of time you’ve most likely had someone express the opinion that you are learning “crap”. The general opinion of the martial arts by the public is that the martial arts are quaint at best. What most people know about martial arts is learned from watching TV where it is portrayed in a manner that is comical at best. Even shows like “Walker: Texas Ranger”, which is supposed to show martial arts in a good light, make them look ridiculous

On top of that many people know someone who knows someone who knows a guy who was a black belt and got beaten up by some “Average Joe”. I’ve studied the martial arts for 20 years and I know several skilled martial artists who lost fights to non-trained individuals, even fair fights. I had a friend that got into a fight with a boxer one day in a parking lot. They put up their hands and my friend, who had lighting fast kicks, threw a right roundhouse kick at the guy’s head, only to have his leg grind to a halt when his jeans refused to stretch the last few inches and he ended up stumbling off balance. This gave his opponent the opportunity to land a roundhouse punch to this temple and knock him out cold. A seasoned black belt knocked out by a boxer with one punch.

With incidents like this and TV shows like “Walker: Texas Ranger” I can understand why to most people the martial arts are a big joke. Though the question show be asked, why are people trained in the martial arts often not able to defend themselves? Why do people, instructors included, say that the martial arts were effective 500 years ago but are not effective today? What is wrong with the martial arts?

My answer to this is that nothing is wrong with the arts themselves; the problem is the people who study them. To give a more well rounded answer let’s address the notion that while the martial arts were effective long ago they are not today. To begin, we have to dispense this notion that people that lived 100, 500, or even 1000 years ago were really different from us. The truth is they weren’t and we are really no better than them.

The one difference between the people living today and those living 1000 years ago is that today we have more knowledge and more technology. There seems to be this notion that people who lived 1000+ years ago couldn’t think as well as we could today. Those that lived long ago were just as smart as we are, just as driven as we are, and just as violent if not more. 1000 years ago people roamed the land murdering, raping, robbing, stealing, and enslaving just as they do today. The only difference is what tools they used and what distance they did it at.

Long ago you might kill someone from 0-5 feet away with a knife, sword, or axe; today you might kill someone from 0-5 feet away with a knife, sword, or axe but you might also kill someone from 0-5 feet away with a gun. It really is the same violence accomplished by the same types of people.

Now we have reliable records from the orient saying that 500-1000+ years ago martial artist not only could defend themselves but they were considered very deadly. In fact, people who knew martial arts were treated with respect because of their abilities. We have records of masters defeating 5 or more people at the same time and often the men were armed. Long ago the martial arts were not only considered effective but they were national treasures.

So if people and the violence they wage haven’t really changed in the last 1000 years, and back then the martial arts were quite effective, what changed? Logically it would have to be the martial arts themselves. But wait, we have the arts passed down from that time and records that can prove it. We can say with a fair amount of certainty that we are doing punches, kicks, blocks, and even forms the same as they were doing them 500-1000 years ago. The other day I was doing a form that was 300 years old.

What has changed? The way people practice the martial arts has changed. Back then skill in the arts could mean life or death and today it’s a hobby or sport people devote a couple of hours a week to. The intent really changed. As recent as 100 years ago people who threw a reverse punch did it with the intent of having that punch hit someone else and inflict injury. Today when people throw reverse punches most do it with the intent of scoring points, impressing their instructors, making a punching bag swing, etc. Back then people revered the arts as deadly and treated them as so; today people treat the arts as a hobby. If you want to see what difference something such as the intent that you train with makes, you can see it at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DEVYxsihlE

Let’s be more specific. In my 20 years I’ve trained with boxers and I’ve trained with martial artists and I’ve seen real fist fights between practitioners of each. I have to say that from my own experience if a boxer and a martial artist fought the boxer would win fairly easily, and I’ve seen that happen on more that one occasion. Now the boxer and the martial arts use fairly similar techniques, so what gives the boxer the edge? Simply that a martial artist trains to throw punches and kicks and the boxer trains to hit people. It’s really that simple.

Today martial artist go up and down the floor throwing punches and kicks but do they ever actually train to hit someone? No. Of course you can say they do sparring but if you really think that point sparring is realistic training then there might not be too much hope for you. However, you do hit people during sparring so even sparring practice does provide a little benefit when it comes to real violence; but sparring alone is not enough.

To really be effective martial artists need to get back to learning how to hit people. 1000 years ago hitting people was a main focus. If you asked someone why they just threw that punch they’d most likely say something like, “to hurt my opponent”. They had a whole arsenal of techniques and they practiced each and every technique with the intent of hitting someone and injuring them.

Now you can say that back then the martial arts were for peace and love and whatnot, but that is really a myth we tell ourselves. Martial arts being about peace and love are a product of the last couple hundred years. If you rounded up 100 martial artists from 1000 years ago probably only 1 or 2 would be training with the intent of self betterment. If you really look at the history of the arts you will see that the arts themselves were originally just a collection of fighting techniques and nothing more. However, the Chinese were mostly Buddhist, Taoist, or students of Confucianism and so they normally mixed those in with their arts, but most of what we today consider to be martial arts is in fact just Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, or even Yoga. It would be the same thing if today I taught my son to be a Christian and then taught him martial arts. He might grow up connecting a front kick with Jesus the same way we connect martial arts with non-violence and mediation.

If martial artists want their arts to be effective again they have to start training to hit people and with the goal of hitting people. I know several black belts with great techniques but if they ever actually hit anything with them they’d break their hands or be knocked off balance. People have to work on grounding themselves, using their hips and hitting things. You have to condition your body to drive force into an object. You have to train yourself to look at a human body and see a myriad of places to hit and know how to step in and hit them.

One of my favorite drills is to have one person stand naturally and have a large pad held tight against their chest. Then their partner hits it and knocks him back, then continues it until he has knocked his partner across the room then they switch and go back. This is a great drill because it trains your body to receive roughly the same shocks it would if you hit a person for real. For most people it is a big eye opener. Most people lack the fundamentals to even drive someone back more than a single step.

Another thing I like to do is when my advanced colored belts do one-step sparing drills I don’t have them stop their strikes at their targets. I have the place their punches, kicks, knife hand strikes, etc on their targets and then they have to follow through and push through their targets displacing their partner. This is a great way to learn both balance and why it is important to use your entire body and not just your arm or leg. Most people end up trying to muscle through someone with just their arm and not their hips.

Bottom line, the reason why boxing is effective and the martial arts are perhaps not is that boxers train to hit people and martial artists don’t. I’m not saying that you need to train like a boxer and actually I think that’s quite counterproductive. An upward slap to the groin, a knife hand to the side of the neck, or a ridge hand to the throat will always be more effective that a punch aimed at a general area of the head. So you don’t have to put on gloves and dance around a boxing ring but you still have to focus on hitting people if you want to do it effectively.

De-Escalating Arguments and Social Violence

By Matthew Schafer
Copyright 2006, All Rights Reserved

Everyone should know how to de-escalate an argument; if you know how to de-escalate arguments you can stop an aggressive person before they get to the violent stage. You should always assume that every argument can end in violence and be prepared to both calm the other person down as well as deal with them if they become violent. Just knowing how to de-escalate arguments can stop the majority of assaults both by acquaintances and strangers.

A 1986 study in The New England Journal of Medicine found that:

"Over 80 percent of homicides noted during our study occurred during arguments or altercations. [I]n cases of assault, people tend to reach for the most lethal weapon readily available. Easy access to firearms may therefore be particularly dangerous in households prone to domestic violence."

Make no doubt, the time in your life when you are most likely to be assaulted, murdered, robbed, or raped is during or just after an argument. Often people get so angry that they are driven to violence and often pick up the closest thing to use as a weapon. Sometimes people do walk away only to find themselves in a kitchen and they end up grabbing a steak knife and coming back to settle their perceived injustice. This is why the most common knife people are stabbed with in the U.S. is a steak knife.

Calming someone down and de-escalating a potentially violent situation is not as hard as many people make it. You don't need to go and get a fancy degree in psychology, all you need are the nine simple rules listed below and a couple of tried-and-true techniques.

The Eleven Rules Of De-Escalation

People get upset and aggressive for one reason: they feel that they are being attacked in some way. Someone may feel that you are attacking their intelligence or integrity and so they get defensive, and then as the situation escalates they get loud and aggressive and then perhaps violent. Since it is the fact that they feel that they are being attacked in some way that is making them defensive, in order to calm them down you have to express to them that you are not attacking them, personally or otherwise. In order to effectively express this to them there are eleven rules you must follow:

1.) See the two of you as not combatants but rather teammates trying to solve a common problem. If someone is arguing with you it is because they see a problem and the only way to calm them down and get cooperation for them it to address the problem, as THEY see it. Try to get to describe the problem as clearly as possible and listen without interrupting. Even if the person is delirious, on drugs, or just making things up go with their understanding of the problem, because even if they are wrong or crazy what they describe as a problem is the actual problem as they see it.

Build the sense of teamwork by using words like “we” and “us” when speaking with them. Listen to their problem and when you try to help them solve the problem as they see it you will start to get them to calm down and cooperate with you.

2.) Respect personal space by giving them 5-6 feet. Your job is to make the other individual feel safe and that it is ok for them to stop being defensive, and one of the easiest ways to do the opposite of that is to encroach upon their personal space. Everyone has a space around them that extends approximately 3 or 4 feet outwards (roughly their arms length) that is considered theirs and you want to make sure that you stay out of that area. Stand back 5 or 6 feet from them to give them plenty of room and allow them to feel comfortable talking to you. Doing this also gives you the benefit of having greater reaction time in the event that they do become violent.

3.) Have non-aggressive body language and if possible angle your body to the side. You want to act and appear non-aggressive because if you appear aggressive or like you’re trying to assert dominance in any way the other person may respond by trying to do the same. Aggressive body language includes things like staring with a fixed gaze, tightening facial muscles, raising your chin, lifting your shoulders, and sticking out your elbows, so you want to do the opposite. Make sure that your gaze is relaxed, your chin is down, your shoulders are lowered normally, and your elbows are not flaring out. If it is possible you want to turn your body to the side so that you are at a 45-90 degree angle to them. The reason for this is that if you are slightly turned to the side you are not perceived as towering over them or trapping them. By turning they will not feel like you are blocking their escape and this will help to avoid triggering their defensive instinct. When you do this they can turn around and leave as well as walk by you.

4.) Take time to think before you speak. The natural reaction is to say whatever comes to mind but you want to avoid doing that. Every time you get ready to say something you should stop and pause for a second to reflect on whether it is the right thing to say, and then open your mouth.

5.) Be calm and talk in a tone that's lower than the one the other person is using. The angrier and louder you get the angrier and louder they will tend to get. What you need to do is relax, be calm, look them in the eye, and speak to them in a calm and even manner. Your natural reaction will be to match their volume but you want to speak calmly and in a tone lower than the one their using because this will help to calm them down.

6.) Deflect insults with deflecting statements. During an argument or emotional situation people will often insult you. The two worst things you can do are to respond to them or to ignore them. If you respond to their insults you can in feed into their emotional energy and get angry yourself; if you ignore their insults you can make them angry because they feel you are ignoring them and they may become more emotional or get violent. Instead what you should do is first realize that the insults come not from the person but from the emotions and often the person will deeply regret them later on when they calm down. Don’t take them personally; after all it is not them insulting you it is their emotions.

Using a deflecting statement shows them that you heard their insult but it bypasses it and gets back to the task of addressing the core issue. The two I use the most are: “I appreciate your opinion but…” or “I appreciate that.” You could also say, “I respect your opinion but…” or “I respect that.” Use these statements then immediately get back to dealing with the issue causing the argument or emotional situation.

7.) Don't talk in absolutes and don't use the words "always" and "never". This is one of the biggest mistakes that people make when arguing. Never ever tell someone that they "always do this" or that they "never do that" because this will just serve to anger them and chances are that there are exceptions to disprove the allegation. Using these words will almost always result in an escalation of the situation so instead tell someone that they "usually do this" or they "usually do that".

8.) Phrase everything as "I feel...". One of the easiest ways to get someone mad is to accuse them of something, and if you repeatedly accuse them of things you will almost always cause them to get defensive. Never ever say, "You don't do this", "You don't like me" etc., because this puts the focus on them and their perceived shortcomings which normally makes them get defensive. Instead you should say, "I feel that you don't do this" or "I feel that you don't like me". By phrasing everything in relation to you and your feelings you take the focus off of them of put it on you and the way you feel. Just by taking everything you want to say to them and phrasing it to them as "I feel that..." you will help them to avoid getting defensive and open the lines of communication.

9.) Always talk about the specific behavior you have issue with instead of talking about them personally. In any situation your goal is not to run the person down, it is to address and hopefully get them to change a behavior. If someone does something you don't like you shouldn't talk to them about how you don't like them and how horrible they are for doing it, rather you should talk about the specific behavior that you have issue with and how you don't like it. By doing this you're not attacking them personally you're only talking about the fact that you don't like something they did. Instead of saying something like, "What's wrong with you, why would you do that?” you might instead say, "I don't like what happened, that behavior needs to change". Always restrict your focus to the behavior you didn't like and don't talk about them personally.

10.) Focus on the future instead of the past. Every second you spend talking to them about the issue that's responsible for the argument is a second the person could snap and get violent. Instead of spending time talking about the past which cannot be changed you should talk about the future which will give you or the other person a chance to do things differently. Rather than fight about what has happened switch the focus to next time. You might say, "Next time this situation comes up this is how I will handle it" or "Next time this situation comes up this is how I want you to handle it". Don't dwell on the past, rather focus on the future.

11.) Don’t argue with an emotional person. When people get upset and angry they don’t respond to logic and reason so you shouldn’t try using them. If someone is really upset then be quiet and let them vent without responding to what they say and after a few minutes it should be out of their system and they should be able to listen and process what you say to them better. If someone is irate then simply walk away or tell them to come back when they’ve calmed down. Give people the opportunity to calm down and get themselves under control before seriously engaging them in conversation. Also, when they’re venting don’t take anything that they’re saying personally because, again, they aren’t being logical or rational and they will often say and do things they don’t mean if order to hurt you. Always remember, emotional people aren’t logical so let them calm down first and then reason with them.

Now we will go to two of the most effective techniques available for calming angry and potentially violent people down.

Technique #1: Repeat, Approve, Respond

"Repeat, approve, respond" is a simple and highly effective technique for taking the emotional energy out of a situation, so effective that it is used by everyone from psychiatrists to telemarketers and from used car salesmen to hostage negotiators. If you talk to a good salesman and really listen to what they're saying you might hear them use it.

The best thing that you can do in a heated argument, or any argument, is to remove the emotional energy. It is the emotional energy that causes people to disregard logic, reason, and common decency. It is that emotional energy which causes people to "see red" and do and say things they would never do otherwise, and there are few better techniques to that than this.

Step 1: Repeat The first thing you want to do is repeat back to them what they just said in a calm and non-judgmental manner. It doesn't have to be word-for-word but it should be the general message. If someone is telling you that you never listen to them you would simply start off by calmly listening to everything they have to say and then when they're finished you'd say, "I don't listen to you" or "So you feel that I don't listen to you".

By opening your response by repeating back to them what they just said it will put them at ease because 1.) they know that you are actually listening the them and 2.) you just said something that they like and that sounds familiar and intelligent to them, which of course it does because they just said it.

Step 2: Approve Now you have to say something that shows that you approve and/or understand the statement you just repeated. For example: "I don't listen to you...I can see how you feel that way", "So you feel that I don't listen to you...thank you for being honest", or "I'm not listening to you...you might be right. Thank you for bringing it to my attention".

Even if you don't agree with them or they're not making any sense you want to say something that shows that you understand them and are compassionate to their argument. Nine times out of ten this will stop them dead in their tracks and they will just look at you shocked. Approving shows that you are open to their argument and let's the emotional energy out so they can respond with reason.

Approving is usually the hardest part of the process for most people. If you get stuck thinking of something to say, just say something that shows that you approve of the communication process as a whole. Examples are: “Thank you for bringing this to my attention”, “great, I love open communication”, “thank you for being honest with me”, “Its good you told me you feel that way”, “I like the fact that you’re being open and honest”, “I’m glad you told me that”, etc.

Step 3: Respond At this point you've demonstrated to them that you are listening to them and you've shown that you are willing to hear their argument so now it is time to respond. "I don't listen to you...I can see how you might feel that way. Maybe I do get to busy and..."

Respond back but make sure that you follow the eleven rules of de-escalation: 1.) see the two of you as a team working to solve a problem, 2.) respect personal space and give them 5-6 feet, 3.) make sure that you are not displaying aggressive body language, 4.) take time to think before you speak, 5.) be calm and talk in a calm and even tone, 6.) use deflecting statements to deal with insults, 7.) don't talk in absolutes or use the words "always" and "never", 8.) phrase everything as "I feel...", 9.) keep the conversation focused on the thing or behavior you have issue with instead of them directly, 10.) keep the conversation focused on correcting the issue in the future instead of dwelling on the unchangeable past, and 11.) don’t argue with an emotional person.

Another great thing about this technique is that it not only takes away their emotional energy but it also removes yours. You can't be yelling back, losing your cool, and saying things you'll regret later if your busy repeating, approving, and responding.

This is a technique that you can do over and over again. You go through the process once and then after you respond they say something else and if there is still some emotional energy left you just repeat the process until all the energy is gone. If the energy leaves and then comes back 5 minutes later you use the technique again.

A rule of thumb is that you don't do the technique more than 5 times in a row because it is at about that number that people start to notice that you're repeating what they've said back to them. So you might do it 4 times in a row and then take a break for a few minutes and then use it again.

You need to practice with this technique to make sure that you have the hang of it. The great thing about this is that you don't need an argument to use it. You can use it in any conversation to make yourself seem more intelligent and thoughtful (repeating back to people what they've just said usually has that effect). I recommend practicing it in every day conversations regularly so you can do it smoothly under duress.

Technique #2: Agreeing

Agreeing is another technique you can easily employ to remove yourself from an unwanted hostile situation. In this technique someone says something stupid to try to provoke you and instead of engaging in an argument you just agree with them. There are two versions of this technique, one for when you are in a situation where you can leave and one for when you're in a situation where you can't.

An example of the first version would be if you're walking down the street and someone yells something nasty at you and you have to respond (the BEST tactic is to ignore them totally because any response my escalate the situation). In this situation you can just say something short such as, "Yep, your right", "I sure am", or even just "Yes" to agree with whatever accusation they're making and then keep walking.

By agreeing you are not adding any emotional energy to the situation, but you might not be taking any out either. If you find yourself in a hostile situation and you want to leave quickly it is far more advantageous to just agree with whatever name you are being called then to argue, but in this technique if someone says something stupid you just agree and walk away.

The second version is used when you can't leave the situation but you don’t feel that you in real physical danger; perhaps you are speaking with a friend, co-worker, or a child. When they say something stupid to provoke you, you simply agree with it and then quickly change the subject.

For example, let's say that a co-worker is in a bad mood and they're telling you that you are horrible at you job. In this situation you could easily get into an argument that would get you nowhere or you could avoid the argument and get back to work just by quickly agreeing with them and then changing the subject. That may go something like this:

Them: "YOU'RE HORRIBLE AT YOUR JOB! WHAT ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING?"

You: "Yup, I sure am. Does anyone know what time the meeting is today?"

If the argument was with your child it may go something like this:

Them: "YOU NEVER LET ME GO ANYWHERE! I HATE YOU, YOU'RE A HORRIBLE PARENT"

You: "Oh yeah, I'm like a meaner version of Hitler. Have you seen the cat lately?"

By quickly agreeing and then changing the subject you can avoid a lot of arguments and save yourself the work of having to de-escalate them.

Technique #3: Acting As If You Feel Worse Than Them

This a technique is not for de-escalating an argument, it is for when you are being verbally assaulted, you can’t escape the situation, and you feel you may be in physical danger. This is designed for someone berating you with insults and trying to make you feel small, weak, and stupid.

This technique works because if someone is insulting and belittling you they are do it so that you feel bad, but if you show them that you feel even worse than they’re trying to make you feel they won’t have any place to go with their insults and will normally give up and walk away.

Let’s say that you get out of your car and someone runs up to you and starts screaming that you cut him off in traffic. It is clear that this could turn into a violent situation so you want to de-escalate it as quickly as possible.

You could throw your hands up in the air and say, “YOU’RE RIGHT! I’M SO STUPID! I MUST BE THE WORST DRIVER ON THE PLANET!” Then you might look at the ground (towards his feet so you can keep him in your peripheral vision) scrunch up your face, and start slapping yourself in the side of the head saying, “STUPID! STUPID! STUPID!”

The point is that you want to make a scene that shows that you feel worse about what happened then they want you to feel. On a scale of one to ten of how bad you could feel about yourself, if you think that they want to be at a ten then make a scene to show them a twelve, or a fifteen. If they’re looking for a ten and you show them a twelve they have nowhere to go and often just write you off as crazy and leave.

If you think the situation can’t be de-escalated and violence is imminent you should immediately go to the technique described next and get ready to start striking targets and causing injures.

De-Escalating Social Aggression

Let's say that someone that makes you feel uncomfortable has approached you and you want to make them back off and leave you alone. That's what we're dealing with in this section.

If someone comes up to you and starts to bother you and you want to make them back off you have three options: 1.) You can be passive and you probably will encourage the aggressor and the situation may escalate, 2.) you can be aggressive and the person will either leave or become aggressive themselves and then a physical confrontation is likely, or 3.) you can use de-escalation techniques to make them disengage and back off at about a 90-95% rate, even with violent criminals.

When They Approach You

When someone approaches you, you want to do two things:

1.) Check to see what their hands are doing. You want to see what their hands are doing because if they attack you it will be with their hands. If one of their hands is in a fist then they're probably planning on throwing a punch; if they're hands are in their pockets or behind their backs they could be hiding a weapon (be careful of anyone who only has one hand in their pocket because the only reason for that is to grab something). If someone is walking towards you and one of their arms is hanging naturally but the other is stiff and not moving then that is a sign that that hand contains a weapon (in the security field this is generally referred to as a "dead arm"). Also notice if they are continually tapping or rubbing an area of their body. If they're doing this usually it is because they have a weapon on them and they are making sure it is still there. Look at people's hands as see what they're doing, take care to notice if they move towards their body.

2.) Look around and check your surrounding area. Look around you and behind you to see who and what is there. Is there anyone else approaching you, from behind possibly? Is there an exit nearby you can run to? Often one criminal will approach you from the front and try to distract you while another attacks you from behind.

Initial Contact

When someone is planning on attacking you usually they will come up to you and try to start a conversation or ask you something. During this time, known as an "interview", they will try to distract you and feel you out while they slowly creep their way closer to attack. When this happens the first thing you want to do is to assertively establish a boundary around you and make eye contact with them. If someone that makes you feel uncomfortable is just walking by you, you should just make quick eye contact with them and get out of their way. However, if you feel that they might attack you (especially if you notice their reaching in their pockets as they near you or one arm is "dead") you should make brief eye contact with them and then put distance between the two of you, like abruptly crossing the road, while keeping an eye on them. Hopefully you have pepper spray or another weapon ready just in case something does happen.

If someone approaches you and you feel threatened you should make eye contact with them. There have been several studies done with repeat violent offenders in various prisons and even the most violent agreed that if their intended victim made eye contact with them it was usually enough to make them pick someone else. Criminals like attacking by surprise and usually just making eye contact is enough to make them feel that their element of surprise has been lost.

If they engage you verbally the first thing you should do is look them in the eye and speak in a calm but assertive voice, establish a boundary, and try to determine their intentions. One of the best questions you can ask is simply "What do you want?" because it cuts to the chase and makes them decide their intentions.

You want to establish a boundary about 5 or 6 feet away from you and make sure that they don't cross it. The more distance there is between the two of you the more reaction time you'll have if they do attack you. If they start to cross the boundary you should first assertively inform them that they need to back up. Most people, of good intentions, will feel foolish and apologize if you look them in the eye and assertively say, "Excuse me, you're getting too close and making me feel uncomfortable! I need you to back up!"

First, inform them of their error and make your feelings about it known because if they're not planning on doing something criminal and you bring their ill manners to their attention they'll usually back up and apologize. This also shows that you are in control of the situation and if they want an easy target they have to go look elsewhere. An example of how this may go is as follows:

They approach you and say, "Hey there, how are you doing?"

You look them in the eye and say in an assertive manner, "Excuse me, you're getting a little too close and I feel uncomfortable! I need you to back up!"

They reply, "Sorry, I just wanted to talk..."

"Well I don't! Please go away!"

When you're at this point you really need to stick to your guns and demand that they respect your boundary because this is where a criminal will try to put you at ease and con their way closer. Whatever they say just ignore it and continue to demand that they back up and give you your space. Don't let up!

If they're persistent you can also say to them assertively, "Give me 5 feet!" Saying this to a criminal generally brings pause and then they tend to obey because this command is a common one used by guards in almost every prison in America. If they are a criminal who has been in prison then saying this will usually give them pause because they'll wonder how you knew to say it to them.

If you're at this point and they still don't respect your boundary then it's time to become aggressive with them and use the "bad dog voice".

The "Bad Dog Voice"

The "bad dog voice" is probably one of the most useful tools at your disposal when dealing with unwanted people. What you do is to give them direct commands with the same tone and inflection as you would if you were scolding a dog who you found defecating on an expensive rug. Upon seeing the dog you'd shout, "NO! BAD DOG! KNOCK IT OFF!" at him and he would respond by flinching away from you. The dog most likely wouldn't understand your words but he definitely would understand your tone.

People respond to that voice just the same way as the dog. There is something about the tone that makes people stop in their tracks and pay attention. If you are trying to get someone to back off the "bad dog voice" has proven effective in stopping them about 90-95% of the time. The trick is to practice and make sure that you are speaking in the same tone as you would as if you were scolding a dog.

You want to use short and direct commands that tell the individual exactly what they need to do to comply with you. You might shout, "STOP! GET BACK! LEAVE NOW! YOU NEED TO LEAVE NOW! BACK AWAY! GO! NOW! BACK OFF!" You don't need to get fancy or be creative with this, you can just keep repeating "BACK AWAY NOW!" over and over until they comply.

If you aggressively shout these phrases while using the "bad dog voice" you will most likely make them actually jump back. In any case you will be making so much noise that they will be worried about someone hearing and if they are criminals they'll most likely leave to find another victim. Even if they are violent criminals about 90-95% of the time they'll start uttering profanities and turn around and leave.

Even if a criminal confronts you and pulls a knife you still might be able to make him back off and leave by using this technique.

If you do this technique and they don't leave then there is no doubt that plan on doing violence to you and you need to prepare to use either weapons or self-defense techniques.

Stance

You want to stand in a confident manner, however, appearing to be confident is not nearly as important as keeping your head up and frequently looking around to be aware of who and what is around you. A criminal will typically choose to victimize someone who is appearing to be confident over someone who has their head up and is frequently checking out their surroundings. A confident person may or may not resist but with a little skill the criminal can just take them by surprise, but a person who is aware of their surroundings may seem them coming and start running and few criminals want to do that much work or draw attention to themselves by giving chase.

When you begin this technique you want to have your feet about shoulder width apart, put one foot ahead of the other, raise your arms and hold your palms out. You want to make sure that you don't straighten your arms and lock your elbows because if they grab a hold of your arms and they're locked then with a simple tug they can pull your entire body around. However, if your elbows are bent slightly and relaxed and they grab your arms and tug your arms can move independently of your body and you can remain in control of your balance.

You want to be very aggressive and shout repeatedly, "BACK UP NOW!" while using the "bad dog voice" and continue until they leave or attack. Often when you begin the technique a criminal will first respond with surprise, then once the surprise wears off they will try to intimidate you to see if you'll back down but if you keep it up you'll soon realize that it won't work and they'll leave. The key is to aggressively continue until they turn and leave.

Since any normal person will turn and leave when confronted with this technique if they stay or proceed to come closer there is little doubt that they plan on attacking you. If they come forwards again you should respond with a preplanned physical response such as using pepper spray or another technique such as clawing their eyes or attacking their groin with an upward slap or hard kick with your shin.

Ideally you should have pepper spray on you and you should have it in your hands as soon as you enter a transitional area like stairwells, elevators, parking lots, alleys, hallways, etc. If you have pepper spray and you are confronted you should hold it against your body and have the other hand held out with your palm extended towards them while you use this technique. Then if they come towards you, you should spray them in the face and then run away.

Even with the best de-escalation skills you should have the necessary physical skills to defend yourself in case the individual attacks rather than leaves. It is imperative that you take a reputable self-defense class to learn effective techniques and then practice those techniques at home to prefect them. You should also learn to use pepper spray properly and make sure it is in your hands before you enter transition areas. Regardless of what weapon you have, if it is not in your hands when the altercation starts you should forget about using it for the time being.

Handling Intoxicated People

When confronted by an intoxicated person the first technique you want to use is simple redirection. When intoxicated the individual is unable to process information as effectively as they should and redirecting their attention off of you and onto something else has proven to be quite effective. To do this you simply ignore what they are saying and pick an object or activity for them to focus on and then simply suggest it to them.

To give you an example, let's say that you are in a public situation and an intoxicated person comes over to you and starts to bother you. You could look past their shoulder and then say, "Hey, that guy is waving at you!" When they turn and look or question you about it you could suggest that the person has just walked around the corner and that they should go and find out what they want because it looked important. Very seldom will they not take the bait and when they leave it will give you time to leave the area as well.