When is it acceptable?

[Celtic_Crippler]

In your opinion, when is it acceptable to respond physically to a "threat?"

[Kempojujutsu]

When the treat happens. Too many fights end with the first person throwing, walking away, while the other is down.

[Billy Lear]

Once the attacker gives verbal intent to do harm he gets a warning from me to back away. If he continues, or comes within striking range it's open season on him. I try to gauge my response to the threat level.

[jdinca]

Depends. For the most part, I would say that it's when the attacker makes the verbal threat. If trying to talk him out of it, or walking away obviously isn't going to work, then I see no reason to give him a chance to do me harm.

[sigung86]

Wasn't it Stonewall Jackson who said, "Get theah th' fuhstest with th' mostest"?

If you feel you need to threaten me, I don't feel the need to stand there and wait for it.

[parkerkarate]

For me, I will not respond until the attacker actually tries to do something. You have to be the second person to respond or it will not be self defense.

[profesormental]

Greetings.

It depends on the environment.

Part of effective self defense and survival trainig is to apply the physical training to real scenarios.

Practice Combat Scenarios should take into account that fights do not occur in a vacuum.

Thus part of a technique sequence should take the location, infrastructure, social environment, etc. into account BEFORE commiting to physical violence.

This is to get reference point as to the objectives of using physical force and power and what Rules of Engagement are in effect to avoid unnecessary trouble afterwards.

Many of the first stages of technique sequences are appropiate for small altercations due to short fuses in parties and such.

The rest of the sequence might be for more lethal group attacks, riots, and muggings or homicide attempts.

The physical movements might be the same, yet the mental focus and intention change somewhat.

Note that sometimes a hard shove back with a fist to the sternum stings enough to scream the command to "Stop this NOW! Let's just GO HOME!" and it can turn into an embedded command and stop the altercation.

Or you could use the command "Please don't HIT ME!!" and they'll say "I WON'T!!" while throwing a telegraphed strike, which can EASILY be countered if properly trained. LOL

Much fun this languege pattern stuff is!!

So the best time is when you set it up, thus you have control.

Many considerations, yet enough for now.

Enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado

[sigung86]

For me, I will not respond until the attacker actually tries to do something. You have to be the second person to respond or it will not be self defense.

That's not entirely true, I don't believe. I think, and I may be very wrong, as an old memory os often a faulty memory, but I believe that you have to show that you were in fear for your health, and well being in order to unleash on the perp.

[sigung86]

Greetings.

It depends on the environment.

Part of effective self defense and survival trainig is to apply the physical training to real scenarios.

Practice Combat Scenarios should take into account that fights do not occur in a vacuum.

Thus part of a technique sequence should take the location, infrastructure, social environment, etc. into account BEFORE commiting to physical violence.

This is to get reference point as to the objectives of using physical force and power and what Rules of Engagement are in effect to avoid unnecessary trouble afterwards.

Many of the first stages of technique sequences are appropiate for small altercations due to short fuses in parties and such.

The rest of the sequence might be for more lethal group attacks, riots, and muggings or homicide attempts.

The physical movements might be the same, yet the mental focus and intention change somewhat.

Note that sometimes a hard shove back with a fist to the sternum stings enough to scream the command to "Stop this NOW! Let's just GO HOME!" and it can turn into an embedded command and stop the altercation.

Or you could use the command "Please don't HIT ME!!" and they'll say "I WON'T!!" while throwing a telegraphed strike, which can EASILY be countered if properly trained. LOL

Much fun this languege pattern stuff is!!

So the best time is when you set it up, thus you have control.

Many considerations, yet enough for now.

Enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado

I am curious and not intending to be offensieve to you Juan, but I would like to know how many actual fights you have been in Juan.

Thanks,

Dan

[Texas Kenpo]

I voted for when the verbal threat is made. BUT IMO this will not always be the case. If someone in a bar gets cross and looks at you and say "I'm gonna have to kick your ###!" but makes no physical attempt to do so I believe it would be out of line. Now say your in a parking garage and someone approaches you and says this......uhoh...I'm not waiting to find out anything else. Its on brother.

[Martin Seck]

Verbal intent is enough for me.

When I was a bouncer this was totally legal (in Atlanta, GA.) A guy says "I'm fixing to kick your ass!" and we didn't have to wait past that to take him outside by any means necessary.

Besides when someone is forming a sentance and thought process behind it, becomes difficult to block LOL.

[Pat Munk]

For me, I will not respond until the attacker actually tries to do something. You have to be the second person to respond or it will not be self defense.

This isn't necessarily true ... Just the threat of an attack is enough to justify a defense.

[Brother John]

In your opinion, when is it acceptable to respond physically to a "threat?"

interesting question.
There's maybe three ways to look at it.
1. Morally.
2. Legally.
and
3. Tactically.

Morally? Whenever you first perceive that you are in immediate danger if you do NOT act.

Legally? When you can show that you were in immediate danger if you did not act and that you had no other recourse available.

Tactically? ASAP!

Your Brother
John

[akskarate1]

I think the Kenpo creed says it all.

[Carol]

When is it acceptable...when a threat presents itself.

When would I do something?

Oh man...to coin a phrase I saw on MartialTalk...my fave Kenpo technique is the Fleeing Chicken

I don't want to fight. Fighting, and the aftermath, can be a big big hassle. I would much rather keep my distance and run away and live to run away another day.

That being said, if someone comes after me, then that slob is going to be a pretty damn committed attacker. And if he catches up to me, my response is going to be...not nice. If his intent is sexual, my response will be doubly not nice.

[John Brewer]

As already posted for me it depends on the environment. If possible I would like to think I'd wait for the actual attack, but as I've found in the past occasionally adrenaline does funny things to you. If my family was involved things might happen a little quicker.

[Celtic_Crippler]

When is it acceptable...when a threat presents itself.

When would I do something?

Oh man...to coin a phrase I saw on MartialTalk...my fave Kenpo technique is the Fleeing Chicken

I don't want to fight. Fighting, and the aftermath, can be a big big hassle. I would much rather keep my distance and run away and live to run away another day.

That being said, if someone comes after me, then that slob is going to be a pretty damn committed attacker. And if he catches up to me, my response is going to be...not nice. If his intent is sexual, my response will be doubly not nice.

The first consideration in self-defesne terms is to make sure you escape the situation alive and in one piece. I don't want to fight either (that's why there's certain bars and clubs I avoid like the black plague )

Another consideration is to find out how your state/area defines "assault" and what the local laws say about your right to defend yourself. In GA, a verbal threat is considered "assault." Now, personally, that doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to attack someone that is running their mouth. But, I'm not going to wait for them to try and hit me either. It only takes one good shot, regardless of how good you are, to knock you out. And you can't defend yourself if you're unconcious.

Verbal threat + within attacking range= somebody's gettin' knocked out! (Hopefully not me LOL)
My 0.02.

[0nslaught]

[quote
=katsudo_karate;46523]
Verbal intent is enough for me.

When I was a bouncer this was totally legal (in Atlanta, GA.) A guy says "I'm fixing to kick your ass!" and we didn't have to wait past that to take him outside by any means necessary.



I am a Bouncer now and where I live (New Hampshire), after a verbal threat, it is legal for me to defend myself and / or the establishment.

[kenpotex]

In order for your actions to be classified as a justifiable use of force, three things must be present.

1. ABILITY: The attacker must be physically capabe of carrying out an assault on your person. For example, if a quadraplegic (sp?) told you he was going to get out of his wheel-chair and kick your ass, it wouldn't be a legitimate threat because he can't carry it out. On the other hand, if the person is physically capable of attacking you, the ability requirement is satisfied.

2. OPPORTUNITY: The attacker must be in the same place you are. A threat over the phone would not be justification for you to hunt the person down since he does not currently have the opportunity to do you harm. However, if he is 10 feet away, he does have opportunity.

3. JEAPORDY or INTENT: You must be able to articulate that you reasonably believed that you were in jeapordy/danger. In other words, you must believe that the other person genuinely intends to carry out his threat.


If all three of these things are present, then there is an articulable threat and you do not have to wait (and should not) until they actually attempt to "make good" on their threats (Yeah, I know...some states have a "duty to retreat," but that wasn't part of the discussion).

[Celtic_Crippler]

In order for your actions to be classified as a justifiable use of force, three things must be present.

1. ABILITY: The attacker must be physically capabe of carrying out an assault on your person. For example, if a quadraplegic (sp?) told you he was going to get out of his wheel-chair and kick your ass, it wouldn't be a legitimate threat because he can't carry it out. On the other hand, if the person is physically capable of attacking you, the ability requirement is satisfied.

2. OPPORTUNITY: The attacker must be in the same place you are. A threat over the phone would not be justification for you to hunt the person down since he does not currently have the opportunity to do you harm. However, if he is 10 feet away, he does have opportunity.

3. JEAPORDY or INTENT: You must be able to articulate that you reasonably believed that you were in jeapordy/danger. In other words, you must believe that the other person genuinely intends to carry out his threat.


If all three of these things are present, then there is an articulable threat and you do not have to wait (and should not) until they actually attempt to "make good" on their threats (Yeah, I know...some states have a "duty to retreat," but that wasn't part of the discussion).

This is almost straight out of the UCMJ. Intent, opportunity, and capability is what is needed to authorize deadly force. But this too can be subjective per personal perspective.
Intent? Did they make a verbal threat or physical threat?
Opportunity? Are they in range to strike or otherwise harm you?
Capability? Unless they're unconcious or handicapped (and sometimes even then) they have the capability.

Again, I stress the importance of being familiar with your states laws. Much of this is governed at the state level. Even then, you may still be subject to a civil suit...so ...use your Kenpo/Kempo wisely.

IMHO, it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 and I'm definately not taking chances with my, or my loved one's well being.