Friday, November 26, 2010

Missing the point

I’m usually very diplomatic toward other Filipino Martial Arts practitioners from other systems and don’t criticize other groups and organizations but I’ll make an exception with this post. It’s not every day when someone comes up with an idea so dangerous and illogical that I’m driven to give my two cents on the matter. A particular FMA system is promoting a radically different approach to knife training. They train the knife as a less-than-lethal weapon, used with locking and trapping techniques, avoiding cutting or stabbing the attacker if at all possible. According to them, they would like to have the option of selecting whether to use the knife or not in a lethal manner. They demonstrate applying locks and takedowns using the spine of a fixed blade knife, applying the weapon as a tool for leverage and pain compliance. 


At first glance, this strategy would seem to be intriguing and worth exploring further. But if you take time to consider exactly what is being proposed, it’ll soon be apparent to anyone who knows and understands weapon use in self-defense that this strategy is, to put it as nicely as I can, extremely dangerous, naïve and ill-advised. The strategy displays flawed rules of engagement (ROE) and a lack of understanding of the nature of knife use in self-defense.


I’m not a lawyer but I know that deploying a knife in a self-defense situation is already an application of deadly force. Maybe a very good lawyer can get me off of a serious assault charge if I used a knife in a fight without actually cutting or stabbing my attacker, but it’s more likely that I’ll be charged for using a knife as a deadly weapon even if never even opened it (for a folding knife) or stabbed or cut with it. If I ever deploy a knife to defend myself, it will be because I truly fear for my life or those of my loved ones and I’m forced to resort to deadly force by the circumstances I’m in. Bringing a knife into play when it’s not legally warranted and relying on the courts to see your actions as benevolent and non-lethal is highly unrealistic. A more rational ROE is to only resort to using a knife when your actions can be legally and morally justified. 


Deploying a knife in a fight should be considered as a deadly escalation of counterattacking options in response to a threat, and that escalation can only be interpreted as the use of lethal force. Training to use the knife for anything other than stabbing and slashing in self-defense will instill hesitation to use the weapon properly. Hesitating to use the weapon fully for just a fraction of a second could mean the difference between surviving the attack or not.


Those who are serious about training to use knives in self-defense consider how to deploy their weapon under stress and train to get their weapon into play in a short a time as possible, precisely because they know that time and distance are vital elements in self-defense that they need to be gained and exploited, not to be squandered going the less-than-lethal route when immediate lethal force is needed. A life-or-death struggle against an attacker or attackers who are probably armed as well isn’t the time to play games with pacifist strategies and hoping to protect your attackers from harming themselves with your knife.


The nature of knives used in self-defense is that if you have to use one, it’s probably under very dire circumstances and you need to stop the attacks immediately, not after a few seconds of locking and taking down the attacker. You don’t use a knife to stop an unarmed drunken uncle making a scene at a family reunion; you use empty-handed skills for that. If your attacker also has a knife and is obvious determined on killing you, you need to strike to stop him dead in his tracks, literally and figuratively, or else the fight becomes a drawn out battle with edged weapons, a worst case scenario for the both of you. At that point, the decision on whether to potentially kill him or not has already been made by him and the circumstances he brought about. You as the victim need to protect yourself and everything else are all secondary considerations.


A closed folding knife can certainly be used as impact weapon or pain compliance tool if circumstances demanded it. But what circumstances are these? The only situation I can think about that might allow me to use this strategy is if I’m suddenly forced to use a folding knife immediately after I get to it, having to respond to an attack and I haven’t had the opportunity to open it yet. Even then I’ll probably be using the knife to gain time and space so I can finish the deployment, opening the knife and immediately using the blade’s point and edge. Knife use in self-defense is more than just having extremely effective technique and tactics; it’s also understanding the circumstances that make it morally and legally acceptable and having a sound, reality-based strategy.


Training to use a knife as a less-than-lethal tool for join locking, taking down and pinning an attacker is pointless and unnecessary, and will only teach habits and instincts that will get you killed. If you’re going to use a knife, it better be for only one reason: to make sure your attacker stops attacking you and you survive, period.

4 comments:

Alice Ty 鄭睎仁 said...

Awesome article!

Kelee Arrowsmith said...

Excellent article! I have never heard of a knife being used in this way, other than post diminishment of the attacker and provided that the imminent danger has passed. I agree, it is dangerous and completely out of context.

vomicz said...

Great article!
With your permission, I would like to translate it to Czech and post it on our website, thus making it more accessible those of our local students who do not understand English very well (with a link to the original, of course). Would that be ok with you?

island_man said...

Sure no problem :)