Get a Chinook II.
http://spyderco.com/catalog/details.php?product=22
Forget about a book or video.
I can't think of anything more intuitive than a knife, and I can think of no other knife that does as good a job as the Chinook II of communicating through its design, what to do.
James Keating and Sal Glesser designed this knife from the ground up for no other purpose than self defense.
It happens to serve well as a field knife, but it shines as a self defense knife.
If the knife inspires your husband to seek out instruction, read what Marc MacYoung has to say:
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/
-----
Most so-called "knife fighting" training that is currently taught has very little to do with how knives are commonly used in violent situations. This is because much of what is being taught is predicated on what can only be called "dueling." This is not to say that what is being taught is ineffective, far from it. In fact, much of what is being taught would work if you ever found yourself in a knife to knife duel. Bad news, it works even better against unarmed or untrained people; which is going to get you into legal hot water when you use it that way. However, the mindset, physics, strategies and attacks that occur in dueling situations are radically different than the many other ways that violent people use knives.
The bottomline is that in the eyes of the law, using a knife on another human being is using "deadly force." There is a very narrow spectrum where the use of lethal force is allowed, and if you don't know it you will end up in prison, losing everything you own to litigation -- or both.
On this Web site, we also address many of the fads, marketing trends, fallacies and pitfalls promoted in the martial arts, women's self-defense, streetfighting, knife fighting markets regarding personal safety. We do this so you can be an informed consumer if you choose to pursue further training.
Quite a bit of dangerous misinformation is promoted as "self-defense" in those markets. It is dangerous because, commonly:
- it is untested and unreliable against both how criminals operate and the wide spectrum of how violence occurs in this society.
- with the training that would work, it is excessive use of force for self-defense -- and is therefore illegal.
- it panders to preconceived ideas, assumptions about violence, dysfunctions, the desire of the student to "win" a fight and -- even more disquieting -- to "prove something."
- it fails to take in considerations/complications regarding violence: like legal repercussions, complications arising from adrenal stress, ingrained moral/ethical inhibitions against violence and the long-term psychological damage of committing severe violence on another human being.
- it does -- as many people outside these markets believe -- promote physical violence as the primary answer to personal safety.
Although these statements are not categorically true, they are prima facie. All too often instruction in these markets overly focus on the physical prowess aspect and ignore the countless other aspects that go into developing effective personal safety habits. Personal safety is not about your ability to fight.
There are countless other issues that are far more important and far more effective for keeping you safe. If your goal is safety, you need to understand what is involved in the subject before you pay for what they call self-defense training, because most of it won't help you against a criminal assault. Nor does it match our definition of what needs to be in effective self-defense training. As such, if you buy into what they are selling as self-defense, then you are wasting your money. Again, we stress, you need to be an informed consumer.
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/
-----
If your husband wants to study knife fighting or self-defense with a knife, let him research it himself and make an informed choice.
Rather than a video, or a book, he might find a weekend seminar with someone like Michael Janich, or the co-designer of the Chinook II, James Keating, more profitable.
Did I mention the Chinook II?
http://spyderco.com/catalog/details.php?product=22
Forget about a book or video.
I can't think of anything more intuitive than a knife, and I can think of no other knife that does as good a job as the Chinook II of communicating through its design, what to do.
James Keating and Sal Glesser designed this knife from the ground up for no other purpose than self defense.
It happens to serve well as a field knife, but it shines as a self defense knife.
If the knife inspires your husband to seek out instruction, read what Marc MacYoung has to say:
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/
-----
Most so-called "knife fighting" training that is currently taught has very little to do with how knives are commonly used in violent situations. This is because much of what is being taught is predicated on what can only be called "dueling." This is not to say that what is being taught is ineffective, far from it. In fact, much of what is being taught would work if you ever found yourself in a knife to knife duel. Bad news, it works even better against unarmed or untrained people; which is going to get you into legal hot water when you use it that way. However, the mindset, physics, strategies and attacks that occur in dueling situations are radically different than the many other ways that violent people use knives.
The bottomline is that in the eyes of the law, using a knife on another human being is using "deadly force." There is a very narrow spectrum where the use of lethal force is allowed, and if you don't know it you will end up in prison, losing everything you own to litigation -- or both.
On this Web site, we also address many of the fads, marketing trends, fallacies and pitfalls promoted in the martial arts, women's self-defense, streetfighting, knife fighting markets regarding personal safety. We do this so you can be an informed consumer if you choose to pursue further training.
Quite a bit of dangerous misinformation is promoted as "self-defense" in those markets. It is dangerous because, commonly:
- it is untested and unreliable against both how criminals operate and the wide spectrum of how violence occurs in this society.
- with the training that would work, it is excessive use of force for self-defense -- and is therefore illegal.
- it panders to preconceived ideas, assumptions about violence, dysfunctions, the desire of the student to "win" a fight and -- even more disquieting -- to "prove something."
- it fails to take in considerations/complications regarding violence: like legal repercussions, complications arising from adrenal stress, ingrained moral/ethical inhibitions against violence and the long-term psychological damage of committing severe violence on another human being.
- it does -- as many people outside these markets believe -- promote physical violence as the primary answer to personal safety.
Although these statements are not categorically true, they are prima facie. All too often instruction in these markets overly focus on the physical prowess aspect and ignore the countless other aspects that go into developing effective personal safety habits. Personal safety is not about your ability to fight.
There are countless other issues that are far more important and far more effective for keeping you safe. If your goal is safety, you need to understand what is involved in the subject before you pay for what they call self-defense training, because most of it won't help you against a criminal assault. Nor does it match our definition of what needs to be in effective self-defense training. As such, if you buy into what they are selling as self-defense, then you are wasting your money. Again, we stress, you need to be an informed consumer.
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/
-----
If your husband wants to study knife fighting or self-defense with a knife, let him research it himself and make an informed choice.
Rather than a video, or a book, he might find a weekend seminar with someone like Michael Janich, or the co-designer of the Chinook II, James Keating, more profitable.
Did I mention the Chinook II?
