The most dangerous enemy in an ambush

I don't teach accuracy.  I teach aggression.  In the Army we called it "violence of action," meaning how HARD you fight rather than how WELL you fight.  To use Dubya's words, "Shock and Awe" is, in my opinion, more important than technical precision.  I wrote about the difference between the near ambush and the far ambush a few weeks ago.  The far ambush allows for judgment, which I mean as the ability to think and formulate a plan.  But in a near ambush, which is what I consider self-defense situations to be, there is no ability to develop a plan.  In fact, taking the time to try to plan something is a sure way to lose in a near ambush situation.

I did not explain that well because I forgot the most important aspect in an ambush.  I have been caught in a handful of ambushes, and the scariest part of them was not the bullets or IEDs or RPGs fired by the enemy, it was the confusion.  When somebody sucker punches you, the pain is not the major problem, confusion is.  In that moment, you have to react instantly to take the Initiative away from the person initiating the ambush, or you get slaughtered.  In the military example, that's what the battle drill is for: throw grenades, assault through the objective with "shock and awe," or violence of action.  No hesitation, no planning and absolutely no RETREATING.  Action is the only thing that will defeat the confusion, which is the real danger.  Not knowing what the hell is going on is what gets people killed in an ambush if they start trying to figure it out instead of just attacking to get the Initiative.  Frags out, charge, overwhelming firepower, and slice through the enemy like a hot razor blade at Mach 5.  That is the battle drill, and the battle drill overcomes the confusion and allows you to get so close that you butt stroke him with your rifle upside his head.

You ask, what the hell are you talking about, Soule?  We aren't butt stroking anybody upside the head and knocking their teeth down their throat.  Why not?  It's about aggression and violence of action, whether I have an M1 Tank or a butter knife.  I want to be on the other side of the bad guy...because I went THROUGH HIM.  I don't stop beating his teeth down his throat until he is no longer a threat.

I train that violence of action and aggression by teaching shooters to move forward.  If you learn nothing else, learn to MOVE FORWARD!  Once you start attacking with overwhelming force--which is not the same as numbers--then the enemy either dies in place, retreats or kills you.  Two of those three are winners, which means the odds of your winning dramatically increase if you become the aggressor.  That is why I spend an hour teaching people how to accurately hit a human torso and three to four hours teaching people how to be MEAN!  I teach them to be aggressive, because emptying a magazine into somebody's torso as fast as possible is much more plausible and effective than trying to calmly line up a perfect head shot while taking fire.  Shoot fast, and move forward!

This is not opinion, it is borne out by history and surveillance footage.  Historically, it is rare for two armies to attack each other simultaneously.  We call that a "meeting engagement," and it is not nearly as common as an ambush or a deliberate attack against a prepared defense.  More importantly from the self-defense shooting aspect, if you watch surveillance video of violent criminals that get met with armed resistance, they usually break contact and run.  Why is this?  Probably not because they are not good at violence, but because they have more to lose.  Not only can they get shot, but the can also get caught and prosecuted.  Prison is an interruption of their business.  Also, criminals generally look for soft targets.  So, if you aren't a soft target, you are less likely to be attacked, but even if you are and you become the aggressor, you are no longer a soft target and are more likely to prevail.  Death is also an interruption of their business.  They don't want to risk either, USUALLY.  That's an important note; there are psychos who won't tuck tail and run.  But, the answer to that is to be EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVE!  The three possible outcomes are the same, they retreat, they get shot or you get shot; bet on the two out of three where you win.

What if I try to retreat?  You get shot in the back.  Most soldiers in war that get shot in combat actually get shot in the back when they start to retreat.  There is probably something genetic in all predators that kicks in when prey turns its back on them.  Violent criminals are predators.  It is your choice whether you want to be prey or not.  Start thinking like the lion, and make them feel like the gazelle!

Violence of action is the only way to regain the Initiative in an ambush.  Having battle drills can defeat the initial confusion of an ambush because you don't have to think about them; in a crisis situation all the blood drains out of your frontal lobes and you get what's called "scared witless" and your fight or flight response kicks in.  Switch it to FIGHT, and attack the bastard.  Otherwise, if you hesitate to come up with some grand scheme, you get shot to shreds, raped, stabbed, kidnapped, et cetera.  Remember, whoever has the Initiative at the end of an engagement is the winner.

Hope that clears up some CONFUSION.  If you like what I'm saying, please share the link to this blog.

Thanks!
Soule (Easy 6)

Cheating is Winning

If I control the Head, I control the body; if I destroy the Head, I destroy the body.

Last week, I wrote briefly about the principle I call Torque.  Many martial arts call it Circular Motion in unarmed combat; in armed combat we think in terms of 360 degree security/situational awareness.  The last of my principles is a specific kind of Torque: against the Head.  If I crank a person’s Head in a direction it is not supposed to go, their body will contort and throw itself into amazing positions to protect its brain and central nervous system—I consider the neck part of the Head too.

I don’t advocate headshots from really any distance with a firearm except in one instance.  If your enemy is down but is still a threat and still trying to engage you from a supine position, then shoot him in the Head from point blank range.  It’s the same thing as stomping on somebody’s Head when they are on the ground and still a threat.

On the unarmed side, it is also important to understand the variety of Damage inducing points on the Head.  So, while moving the Head will move the body, attacking the Head in the vulnerable points can incapacitate, maim or kill the enemy.  Eyes, ears and throat (I distinguish the neck as the whole thing and the throat just being the front part of the neck) all can incapacitate with very little force.  The top of the nose, the temple and orbital bones around the eyeball are all capable of sustaining incapacitating Damage with a little bit more force.  For the boxers, the chin button is also very effective if you hit it perfectly and knock a guy out.  There are many more, like the ear drum, the brain stem, the third vertebrae, et cetera.  You don’t need to know all of them to be effective, but you should know a handful and know how to inflict maximum Damage to them.  Unarmed strikes to the Head should simulate putting bullets into it.  You want to affect the brain.  Your hands cannot penetrate the cranium like a bullet can, so you have to find targets that can simulate the same kinds of Damage.

As for applying Torque to the Head, there are two desirable goals from it.  Taking away their focus, by changing their eye line and/or balance is the first.  This controls their ability to see you doing things, like drawing a Weapon, or going in for a finishing blow.  The second is to attack the neck with Torque to cause paralysis.  To do this, you need to move their Head and get them into a position where their own body weight and/or strength can assist you in snapping their neck, traumatic Damage that ends an engagement.  That is the key to remember when attacking the Head; you can end the engagement very quickly and easily.  For non-lethal scenarios, like crowd control or private security, attacking and controlling the Head can put somebody out of the fight quickly and efficiently, without having to Damage the body or break bones.

So, those are my principles: WIDTH.  WIDTH does not have any deep philosophical meaning; it was just a convenient acronym-word that soldiers could remember.  But, if you think of the intent of these blogs, it is to expand the WIDTH of combat practitioners from competitive shooters to unarmed martial artists.  To review quickly:

Weapon: The first rule of unarmed combat is: Don’t Get Into It!  Anything can be used as a Weapon.  However, the most important Weapon is you, your brain and your instincts.  So, when you pick up a knife or a gun or a club, these become the extensions of yourself.  Be the Weapon! 

Initiative: Shoot First, Move Forward!  Remember, regardless of who Initiates the engagement, the winner is the one who has the Initiative at the end of the engagement; combat is essentially a fight for the Initiative. 

Damage: You regain the Initiative by causing Damage to vital organs, the central nervous system, or eliminating senses.  How hard you hit is irrelevant; where you hit is critical. 

Torque: Being the center of 360 degrees of situational awareness, you can defeat threats from any angle, using circular motion.  Circular motion/Torque breaks all holds, generates power and over-powers single muscles using entire body weight.  It also allows you to move to orient on the target and engage with a firearm from any angle on the 360 degree arc. 

Head: If I control the Head, I control the body; if I destroy the Head, I destroy the body.  The brain bucket is the processor and memory storage for the human computer; shutting it down, even temporarily, allows you to defeat any enemy.  The vulnerable areas of the Head do not require large size to Damage. 

So, remember WIDTH.  This came about because I had a year in Korea to train up my soldiers in a quick and easily understandable way to counter threats on a peninsula where everybody is a martial artist.  It is nothing new, it was simply a distillation of principles I learned in American and Chinese Kenpo, Ninjutsu and Jujitsu in the preceding ten years.  It is a word and an acronym that anybody can understand.  It is a five step process for HOW TO CHEAT!  Remember, if you don’t have to “cheat” to win, then you are not really in a self-defense or combat situation.  You are dueling, which may be dangerous, but it has rules and controls.  In situations that are out of control and without rules, these principles may be useful to you, whether armed or unarmed.  Again, I am not a master of any martial art, or a sniper, but I'm a pretty good pistol shot and I survived three tours on the front lines of Iraq because I understand Initiative is everything.  I get the Initiative by being more aggressive than the other guy.  I retain the Initiative by causing critical Damage, using mass effects of weaponry on his vulnerability; in other words I take guns to knife fights.  That philosophy of most aggressive and these principles kept me alive in combat and maybe useful for you in a self-defense situation.

Last note: WIDTH is a hierarchy. First rule of unarmed combat is don't get into it, get a Weapon, seize Initiative, cause Damage using Torque and finish it by controlling or attacking the Head.  That should be the process, not just the principles.  The engagement could end after any one of those has been achieved, by the way, but if you start trying to apply Torque from a defensive position where you don't have the Initiative, you will be disadvantaged.  Understand this, very few violent criminals have gone through extensive armed or unarmed combat training, but they are very good at defeating skilled opponents because they can't afford to lose.  So, instinctively violent criminals understand Damage, they understand Weapons of opportunity, and they understand the first rule of unarmed combat is to never get into it.  Most importantly of all, they understand that cheating is winning. 

Soule (Easy 6)

Why Europe is Lost

So instead of me writing about Torque, which is the concept of circular motion in unarmed combat, 360 degree security and situational awareness, and shooting in any orientation in armed combat, I am going to post a link that will piss you off.  This is a live question and answer session on Reddit with Tim Larkin, who again, I strongly endorse.  But, I want you to ignore Mr. Larkin and even the BJJ or Krav Maga trolls who get into stylistic stuff, instead look at the comments from the guys from the UK.  The only point I will make is that they are called Subjects of the Crown for a reason:

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/6zo70h/iam_a_violence_expert_who_has_trained_over_10000/?limit=500

Please like and share the blog.  I like to think I'm thinking thoughts that make a difference in Making America Violent Again.

Thanks,
Soule
(Easy 6)

It's Not How Hard You Hit, It's Where You Hit

The third principle I used to teach soldiers I called "Damage."  I've been reading a lot of Tim Larkin's stuff lately, he refers to this as "Injury."  It means the same thing.  I used to tell the biggest guy in the formation to come up and punch me in the chest to demonstrate the difference between pain and Damage.  As he would reach back to swing, I'd put my index finger right next to his eyeball.  So, that's the unarmed demonstration.  The principle of Damage is a little more complex when it comes to being armed, because while it's optimal to put bullets into the heart, brain-stem or between the eyes, that often requires more precision and thus time.  So, in defensive shooting, I say, "Well, there's Good and there is Good Enough."

Good Enough is elimination of the threat.  This is the difference between combat accuracy training and marksmanship.  If shooting the heart or brain is optimal, then shooting anywhere on the chest or head is good, and in real chaos shooting anywhere from the groin to the scalp is okay if you do it enough.  That's the other point of Damage: it can be cumulative.  One shot in the snot box is fantastic if you are a sniper, or a hostage rescuer that trains to shoot guys through the mouth to sever the brain-stem with their MP5s.  I am neither of those, so I think it is Good Enough to empty seven .45 caliber rounds into someone's upper torso.

In precision fighting, like unarmed fighting, or hostage rescue, Damage has to be precise if you're trying to eliminate the threat.  In self-defense shooting, Damage can be more area targeting rather than point targeting because it's cumulative.  The apparent contradiction to my title I hope to clear-up right here.  While it is true that where you hit is more important than how hard you hit, how many times you hit, is more important than where you hit.  In other words, shoot as fast as you can and still be Combat Accurate, which is a six-inch group in the upper torso, rather than slow and precise.  Speed causes more Damage than accuracy in self-defense shooting.  It is better to put three rounds into a six-inch group in one second than one round into the heart in the same second, or three rounds into the heart in three seconds.  It actually causes greater Damage if you spread out the shots, and it is much more efficient in terms of the time it takes to eliminate the threat.  Three rounds into their chest before they hit the ground is success.

Wrongness: I had a friend who was a black belt, a pretty good pistol shot and an excellent rifle shot.  She said if she ever got into a gunfight she would "shoot the guy in the hand to disarm him."  First of all, that's highly unrealistic from a training perspective.  Hands are very small targets, and they move more than any part of the body, especially when they are shooting...AT YOU.  Secondly, I am not sure you'd be able to defend that in a court of law.  "I was in such mortal danger that I took the time to line up a shot on his hand to disarm him, Your Honor."  Lastly, if your life is in danger--which is the only time you are justified in using a firearm--you need to end the threat.  Even if you had the skills to shoot somebody in the hand, they have another hand with which to pick up the gun again and kill you.  But, in reality, there is no time for that in a self-defense shooting situation.  Get the barrel of your pistol pointed at upper torso as fast as you can, and engage as rapidly as you can while keeping your bullets inside their torso.  Speed regains the Initiative, and Damage secures it at the end of the engagement, and remember whoever has the Initiative at the end has won.

More wrongness: practice head shots.  The zombies ain't coming, folks, and what did I say about the hands moving?  So does the head.  The head is the most motile large part of the body, especially in a dangerous situation.  It is constantly scanning, moving, turning.  It does not wait for you to shoot it.  The torso, being the center of the body to which all the appendages are attached and moving from, is the least motile and it's in the middle and offers the largest surface area to shoot at.  So, again, unless you are rescuing hostages, don't aim for the head.  The military has even stopped training snipers to only take head shots, because it takes too long and it is unnecessary except in hostage situations.

Rightness: Maximize Damage.  In unarmed combat, that means targeting specific vulnerable points of the body like the eyes, the throat, etc.  In shooting, that means penetrating the upper torso with multiple bullets causing massive system shutdown.  If you completely miss the heart but put three rounds into the rib cage, you can hit both lungs, the liver or the spleen, sever the spine, cut the aorta, puncture the diaphragm, or rupture the windpipe; nature put the rib cage their as protection, so get inside it.  Any two of those targets combined will be enough to eliminate a threat, regardless of how big the threat is.  If you miss the rib cage and empty a magazine into the lower torso, you can eviscerate the intestinal tract, still sever the spine, rupture the stomach or kidneys, shatter pelvic bones, or puncture the bladder; any four of which will capitalize on the trauma and blood loss of the gunshot wounds by contributing poisonous chemicals to the blood stream.  That is "Good Enough."

If the language in the above paragraph shocks you, you should not carry a gun.  If you try to "shoot the gun out of their hand," you are gonna die even if you miraculously succeeded in doing that, because they will take your gun away from you and empty it into your torso.  I deliberately use cold, calculating and clinical language to increase awareness of our mortality, because in 1950s America, everybody remembered how fragile we are.  Today we get disgusted at the mere mention of "eviscerated intestinal tracts," what a bunch of wusses.  Refusing to be a victim means being willing to use violence against violent people, and knowing the consequences.  That means using Weapons, taking the Initiative, causing maximum Damage.

There's two more principles I will be writing about in the coming weeks to fill out the acronym I used to teach soldiers the wide range of self-defense options.  Hope you're liking these methods of Making America Violent Again.

Lastly, I keep saying this, I strongly recommend researching Tim Larkin's material on-line and his books.  He teaches techniques I don't necessarily use, but as a Philosopher of Violence, he really gets it.  I don't know him, never met him, I'm sure he doesn't know I exist, but his written words are the best knowledge source for understanding violence I've yet come across.

Soule
Easy 6

Be the Weapon, Not an Idiot

Preface: Let me say this right up front, I am not trying to disparage martial arts.  In reading this, some will think I am contradicting what I wrote last about fighting to the gun, fighting for the gun before fighting with the gun.  I like martial arts, I physically can't do them much any more because of numerous surgeries, but I think studying martial arts is critical to self-defense.

Having said that, martial arts, or what I will refer to as unarmed combat, should be the last resort in defending yourself, not the first resort.  Tim Kennedy is an amazing martial artist, but he does not go on missions with his Special Forces team unarmed.  When I said Be The Weapon, I didn't mean be Jeff Speakman taking on organized crime with your bare hands in a movie.  Apparently I need to clarify what I wrote last time.  I said if you Be The Weapon, you can kill your enemy with a beer bottle or a B2 Bomber, but I was not advocating fighting the Taliban with a beer bottle, the bomber is much more efficient.  One of my friends who is a martial artist agreed with me profusely about being the weapon, saying that is why he chooses to defend his home with a katana (a samurai sword) instead of a firearm because it was more "honorable".  This was not the point I was trying to make, and it illustrates a big problem in martial arts.  They are trying to teach people cultural norms that no longer exist.  I think that's fine for kids martial arts programs; teach them honor and integrity and philosophies of non-violence.  But we (tragically) no longer live in the era of dueling.  So there is no such thing as "honorable combat" In the age of modern terrorism and violent crime.  That ended (badly) when the Polish Cavalry charged into Germany's Blitzkrieg on horseback.  Honor has nothing to do with self-defense, and being efficient at killing your enemy doesn't make you less honorable.

A great honor of mine was to be considered a personal friend of Grand Master Mike Pick, a tenth degree black belt and one of the best unarmed combat fighters and instructors in America.  When I met him he had a knife on one hip and a .45 caliber pistol on the other.  He was a Marine in Vietnam and learned the value of the tools of violence when it comes to efficiency.  If he's packing heat, maybe you should too.

I love martial arts, and I studied them off and on for twenty years.  Some systems I studied were very philosophical, some were very pragmatic, and I liked them both for different reasons.  More philosophical arts are not worse than more pragmatic ones, by the way, they just have different goals.  All of that is good.  But, unarmed combat is the last resort, not the first resort.  Thinking a black belt makes you safe against a guy with a sniper rifle is delusional.  Tom Clancy once wrote that the first rule of unarmed combat is Don't Get Into It, and I've been telling people that for twenty-five years.  It is not, "I choose to put myself at a disadvantage to prove how much more honor I have than my enemy."  That will get you shot.  By guys like me.  We believe in "cheating."

I bring guns to knife fights, I bring Apache gunships to gun fights, and I bring the USS Nimitz Air Wing to wars against insurgents in Toyota trucks.  I don't believe in fighting fair.  Now, if you live in a place where you can't legally have a firearm, then you have to get good with the most lethal tool you have access to.  Another great honor of mine was to attend a knife fighting seminar by Professor David James, who lives in New York City where only felons are allowed to have firearms.  So, he trains with a knife.  He is the best knife fighter I have ever seen.  If you live in such a place, then yes, by all means, get really, really good at fighting with the tools you are allowed to have.  If you work in a place where you can't have a gun or knife, like an airliner, then get really good at unarmed combat.  I am not legally allowed to have a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, so I have to make due with firearms.  And I know enough unarmed combat to get me to my tools of violence.

Unarmed combat skills are very important, primitive weapon skills are very important, but find the most efficient way of eliminating the threat to your person and getting home.  There were a hell of a lot of good martial artists in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but the US had a more efficient method of defeating them.  In combat, if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying.  At no point in any war of the last hundred years did somebody throw down there rifle when their enemy ran out of bullets to go fisticuffs with him; they shot his ass.  The guy that wins the hand-to-hand combat engagement because both sides ran out of bullets is the guy with the bigger bayonet.  If you do not have to cheat to win, you aren't really in a life or death struggle, you are in a sport.  Since sabers at dawn is frowned upon these days, sports are never deliberately mortal anymore.  Remember, the first rule of unarmed combat is Don't Get Into It!

"Honorable" is a great word for a tombstone.
Soule

Easy 6