Gun v Knife experts

[szorn]

I realize this is an old post but just wanted to throw in some thoughts regarding the original video- The series of videos have been passed around FaceBook quite a bit and essentially dismantled by those that have more knowledge and experience. Most of the flaws have been covered but to be blunt this is what happens when martial artists attempt to apply the martial mentality to violence. Things get overly complicated and they attempt to reinvent the wheel or find cool and unusual techniques that they can call their own. The truth is when it comes to surviving bad situations simple and efficient is almost always best.

Steve

 

[szorn]

Agreed.

A question, or point at least, to present: In your final bout where you gained positive control of his attack arm, had the attacker still been actively trying to combat you what would the concensus be on one handedly deploying your sidearm at that time?

On its surface, I would imagine just pulling it and popping a round in his head would likely land you in jail. However, if you retrieved the weapon, and poised yourself to release his arm and immediately put a few feet between you and him (as much as you can), I can see where this could change the situation enough. If he then gets up to come after you again I see it as feasible to have put enough distance between you and him to make a difference since you were in control, on top, and he was laying on the ground. On the other hand by this time he could have digressed enough to not try again (doubtful, but possible.) Either way, you're in a much better position than immediate contact distance playing a lay and wait game, and now you've taken the upper hand (as much of one as you can) in the situation, and even given him a second chance to rethink his actions (in the eyes of the law.)

I know the answer from a military perspective. However, here there are legal issues to worry about (no matter how much I wish there weren't)

If able to successfully gain control of the weapon-bearing limb why would you want to give up that control for a very hopeful attempt of pulling your sidearm, getting it on target, and neutralizing the threat BEFORE he purposely or incidentally stabs you to death? You would be completely justified in using lethal force but the problem is that with realistic attacking energy it becomes difficult to maintain a secure grip on the weapon-bearing limb with only one hand. The better option would be to maintain control of the weapon-bearing limb, use vicious unarmed skills to diminish the attacker's ability to continue his assault, then either neutralize the threat in an unarmed fashion or find the opportunity (such as after he has hit the ground) to disengage and deploy your sidearm.

I could see where the court might see it as you have gained control of him and then proceeded to use excessive force (since you were previously in control.)

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say that has/would happen, but I can easily see that coming up in today's world. It would likely depend on witness testimony of course.

Contact and control are two different things. As long as the criteria for AOJP are present and the assailant is armed and can continue his assault, he is NOT under control and still presents a lethal force threat. If you disarm the assailant and knowingly shoot him after the fact, then there is the likelyhood you will face legal trouble.

Steve