Unarmed Combat IS Combat. It's just really Uncomfortable Combat.

Good Unarmed Combat: be the guy standing up!

I taught a great bunch of people in Canon City last weekend, and as always at the end of my classes, I opened it up for questions.  One of the students asked, “What do you do if somebody grabs you from behind?”  We had just covered a basic gun-grappling technique and covered shooting from retention, so it was a fair question.  But it was really a question about unarmed combat rather than Armed Self-Protection, which was my initial answer.  This led to several students looking for recommendations for “self-defense” classes.  I don’t think I did a very good job answering their questions, even though I did recommend a couple of good unarmed combat schools in Colorado Springs.  So, today I am going to write about why I couldn’t give a very good answer and what a better answer is.

First of all, the students were looking for me to recommend a martial arts dojo.  But, as I have written about many, many times, I do not believe that most traditional martial arts like Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Kung-Fu, Aikido or Jujitsu (even Brazilian Jujitsu) are useful in teaching the unarmed combat skills necessary to defend yourself in a deadly force, lethal encounter.  I believe they are good at teaching fighting, whether in a ring or on a playground or in a bar, but such fights are not situations that will be deemed “self-defense” by a criminal justice authority after the incident, which is how self-defense has to be legally understood.  There are a few good hand-to-hand combat systems that have very little to do with traditional martial arts or competition that are good for self-protection in a lethal force encounter.  Some of these that I am familiar with are Vee Arnis Jujitsu, Combat Krav Maga, Target Focus Training, some modern styles of Ninjutsu and some schools of Jeet Kune Do.  I believe these systems can be very useful in self-protection training with the right instructor.  The problem I found with studying a few of these more practical, useful “self-defense systems,” is that they teach good skills, but they are still teaching people to use them in “fights.”  I call those kinds of situations “bar-fights,” whether they happen in a bar, a playground or a Wal-Mart on Black Friday.  Those bar-fights are situations that will not be adjudicated as “self-defense” by criminal justice authorities, especially if you apply lethal—effective—techniques in such situations.  Now, if you can find good instructors who truly understand when it is justified to apply lethal unarmed self-protection techniques, the skills you can learn in these modern systems are very useful.  If you have children under the age of 18, I think traditional martial arts are a great thing for them to learn about kinesthetic awareness, flexibility, body mechanics and gracefulness.  I don’t think anybody under the age of 18 should be involved in modern, lethal systems of self-protection because kids on playgrounds shouldn’t be breaking each other’s neck.  Conversely, anybody over the age of 18 should not be studying traditional martial arts, because they will not save your life in an actual unarmed combat situation; kickboxing and wrestling are not effective at killing people trying to kill you.

The answer I gave the student was that after twenty years of studying various martial arts in various parts of the country and world, I had lost faith in the ability of 2000 year old monastic workout programs to protect me.  So I got a concealed carry permit and a handgun, and now shooting is the only martial art I study.  When I can’t carry a gun, I carry a knife, and I know how to use it as effectively as a gun at close range.  When I can’t carry a knife, I carry a solid metal pen that I know how to use as effectively as a knife if I had to defend myself in a weapon-free environment.  But, that is not a good answer.  The truth is, you have to have some unarmed skills in situations where you don’t have a self-protection tool.  The answer I would like to have said is this: most traditional martial arts are great for kids to learn how not to hurt each other, but useless for adults.  However, there are some excellent self-protection systems like Tim Larkin’s Target Focus Training and SOME Krav Maga schools, if they are not corrupted into being McDojo workout studios.  The key is to find a system that does not believe, as many traditional martial arts believe, that they are better than knives, swords, guns, spears or aircraft carriers.  A good unarmed combat system should be dedicated to getting you armed.  The only fights that a good unarmed combat system should encourage are the fight TO the gun/knife/shovel and the fight FOR the gun/knife/screwdriver, so that you can utilize the gun/knife/automobile as a tool for your self-protection. 

The martial arts industry complicates the concept of self-defense so much that we lose sight of this simple truth: an actual self-defense situation is one where you would be justified in using a gun or knife if you had one.  Almost nothing the martial arts community teaches provides for that level of lethality.  The martial arts industry calls everything they teach “self-defense,” even though almost none of it rises to the level of justified homicide.  If a situation does not rise to the level where you could justifiably shoot or stab a violent criminal, then it probably is not legally self-defense; it is probably a “bar-fight.”  You would not shoot a person for spilling their drink on you in a bar, nor should you break his or her neck with your bare hands for doing the same.  Kickboxing or wrestling around on the ground with somebody for some minor violation of polite etiquette IS NOT JUSTIFIED SELF-DEFENSE!  Nor is it even self-protection when you could have just walked away from the bar or the conflict.  Conversely, kickboxing or wrestling around on the ground with somebody who is TRYING TO KILL YOU, will not work!  What works is getting out of the condition of being unarmed as quickly as possible when confronted with a violent criminal predator.  That is what effective unarmed combat systems teach you; you may need to hold a guy off with empty hand for a second or two by jabbing a thumb in his eye, or kicking him in the groin, but that is just to get to your self-protection tools.  Ultimately the goal of GOOD unarmed combat systems, is to get you armed as quickly as possible to end the threat, and if you can’t get to a tool, then you have to use your body like a bullet and apply only lethal techniques that kill, blind, maim or paralyze the threat just as effectively as a bullet or stab wound.  Any sort of classical martial art that teaches “weapons are for the impure of heart” or “guns are for cowards,” is nothing but a religious school teaching eastern philosophy.  There is nothing wrong with that; I loved studying eastern philosophy and religions in conjunction with my martial arts for twenty years, but it has NOTHING to do with real self-defense in real combat situations where it is kill or be killed.

The question is not: “what do I do when somebody grabs me from behind?”  Nor is the answer complicated by the technical aspects of defending against a rear choke, a rear bear hug (arms pinned) or a rear bear hug (arms free); the answer is complicated by the intent of the attacker.  The real question is: “what is this person trying to do to me?”  If the person is trying to kill/rape/maim/abduct you, then get to your gun and shoot her; to get to your gun remember this: GROIN, EYES, GUN or EYES, GROIN, GUN!  If the person is trying to tackle you because you gave him the middle finger, then buy him a drink.  Ask questions, like, “What do you want?”  Or, “What are you doing?”

Carry a knife up your sleeve and if the answer to those two questions is wrong or silence, then jab the blade into his abdomen/thigh/femoral artery/genitals/diaphragm as many times as it takes to persuade him to let you go.  Recognize, however, that just because he drops you after you stabbed him four times, that does not necessarily mean he is done with you.  Now would be the time to draw your gun and if he continues to attack, put about five to fifteen pistol slugs into his ribcage/skull.  The question is not: “What do I do if this particular situation develops this particular way using this particular hold or this particular attack?”  Those are martial arts questions, not self-protection questions.  The self-protection question is this: “can I LIVE WITH inflicting mortal damage to this asshole?”  If the answer to that question is “Yes,” then it is probably an actual “self-defense” situation, and you should inflict mortal damage to the asshole.  The obverse question is this: “can I LIVE, withOUT inflicting mortal damage to that asshole?”  If the answer to that question is “No,” then it is definitely an actual “self-defense” situation, and you should absolutely inflict mortal damage to that asshole.  How you do it simply depends on what you have available.  I like knives; they don’t run out of bullets, and at arm’s length they are every bit as dangerous as a firearm.  If nothing else, I use my bare hands to get to the bad-guy’s knife, and his knife to get to his buddy’s gun, and his buddy’s gun to get to the Republican Guard’s tank.  Self-defense is killing; killing is self-defense.  Kickboxing, jujitsu, aikido, karate, tae kwon do, et cetera, are NOT about killing.  They are NOT self-defense.  Unarmed self-defense just means that you didn’t have a gun to do your killing with AT FIRST.