Knife Self-Defense - Tough Question???

eekman

eekman

Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
36
I carry a knife for self defense, most everything I've studied in the past puts an emphasis on "defanging the snake", the idea of attacking the offending limb, and showing restraint by not going in for the "kill". The theory is that your only attacking what you "need" to in order to defend yourself, your not as likely to kill
someone this way, and it will look better for you in court later.

Another trend I see people advocating is the idea that if you are in a knife-situation you are in a life and death situation *not* a fight. The bad guy (BG) will have a "killers mindset" and if you don't have one too your not going to survive.

So here is my Question: Once you are in this nasty situation, do you:

(A) attack mostly limbs trying to stop the bad guy? Upside: you hopefully don't kill anyone, and your fight in court could be easier. Downside: your chances of living to get to court aren't as good...

(B) go into the mindset that says I must attack with everything I got if I want to live, because thats what the BG will be doing. My theory here is less slashing, more stabbing, especially to the face and neck, dispatch the guy and get outa there. Upside: maybe you have a better chance of surviving. Downside: you have a better chance of going to prison for murder.

PLEASE NOTE: This question makes 3 assumptions: (1)that we are talking about a bona fide self-defense situation (2) knife is the self-defense weapon at hand (3) retreat is not possible. Please don't tell me to "run", or to "just shoot the guy", I've really struggled with this question for a while.

Thanks for your help!
Eek
 
IMHO you take what you can get in such a fight. You've run out of retreat space and you must assume that the BG is out to do you in. A finely choreographed battle is out in those situations. Slash, stab, kick, bite, etc. - no rules. Of course there are many situations you might find yourself in short of the life and death fight. You need to use some judgement on what level of force you'll use in less threatening situations - the moral and legal consequences come into play.
 
It seems to me that if you have already tried to run and/or de-escalate the encounter, you are within your rights to defend yourself with whatever means and force necessary. If you do somehow incapacitate an opponent (hamstring him, for example) and then kill him in a cold-blooded fashion, then you've clearly gone beyond what was necessary for your personal safety. If the only way to stop someone bent on inflicting bodily harm to you or another is to "de-animate" them, I don't see how you can be blamed. The important point to make, I think, is that you tried to avoid this situation. Past that, things are no longer your responsibility.
 
Back against the wall, no-where to run, s/he's armed (knife, piece of re-bar, stilleto heel shoe, anything (s)he can kill me with, and being asthmatic, that could mean MACE even) My intent is going to be to kill him/(her) before I get killed.
If I stop them before they are dead, or they take off before they are dead, more the better... but my intent will be to kill them before they can kill me in that type of situation.

Also, I wouldnt count on "de-fanging the snake" to stop someone... If I was 100% intent on killing someone, I doubt it would stop me from trying to continue killing them... also you really dont have much of an idea if they are crazy/on horse tranq's until the toxicology report comes back after the fight (that is, if you survive, and he doesnt).
But, I dont think going for broke right away is the proper way of handling something, but I also think everyone should be prepared to do more if de-fanging or similar techniques dont work to stop someone.
 
I agree with Loki that to a large degree, your attacking/counterattacking options will be determined by the flow of the encounter.

If it's a situation that would justify shooting in self-defense, it certainly justifies killing with the knife. But killing is not the goal. Stopping the attack is the goal. At least until the SuperMegaParalysis Ray is invented, the most effective methods of stopping the attack usually involve a great risk of killing your attacker (gun, knife, choking, etc.)

Defanging the snake is a concept from the Indonesian and Filipino arts. It's to encourage a degree of mercy over ruthlessness (when possible.) But if your options have already been so limited as to require your fighting (with a knife!), you'll probably have to counterattack like a disciplined maniac (defanging snakes be damned.) The idea of defanging the snake seems, to me, to be most relevant when one has and avenue of controlled retreat. Attack in retrograde, as our moderator so often asserts. You are backing up, while attacking the weapon wielding arm of the attacker as he puts it in range by launching attacks against you.

The usefulness of this specific tactic shrinks if space is so constrained that you can't back up. If you're in such close range that both you and your opponent can virtually reach out and touch each other, then "defanging the snake" might change meaning a bit. You might trap his weapon arm/hand with your "live hand", and simultaneously attack his neck or eyes or other vital targets that provide a greater chance for you to IMMEDIATELY stop his unlawful attack on you. In this instance, defanging the snake is a means to the end (decisively stopping the fight.)

Or maybe you're a master and feel like you can show more mercy than he's shown you by disabling the arm. Iffy.

I guess I didn't speak to your question so much as spew some thoughts. I don't think there's really an ultimate answer, though, at least not here. If you get stuck in a life/death struggle, I think the choice at that time will be imminently clear. If you can see your looming death, neck shots with a knife might not feel so extreme to effect your escape.
 
Although I carry a self-defense knife, I cannot imagine using it lightly.
In fact, I cannot easily imagine any situation that serious or devoid of other options.
I would need to genuinely fear for my life, or the life of someone I love.
In such a case, I would not attempt to predict what I would or would not do, and I don't think anyone else really knows what they would do, either.
Nonetheless, the situation will have crossed a line which in Oregon justifies deadly force in self-defense.
This does not include anger, "stepping outside to settle this," a contest or a duel.
It involves genuine fear for one's life, and that justifies whatever a person has to do to survive.
 
Ever considered that wounds inflicted while "defanging the snake" could be presented by a savvy prosecutor as "defensive wounds" on the POSBG (piece of $h*t bad-guy) received while he was defending himself from Mr/Ms Upright Citizen/BF Member? You could be presented as the aggressor.
You will have to survive 2 very serious encounters. The first of which is the one on the "Street" & the 2nd in the courtroom. If things go badly for you in #2, you may get all of the blade training you could ever want in the Iron Pipe Hotel.
 
There is an excellent thread discussing this in the Strider forum. Some excellent insight, wisdom and real-world advice. I read it and it gave me a pause to think about what i would do in a self-defense situation with a blade. It is well worth a read/review.
 
If u are using a knife as a weapon, u have crossed into lethal force.

If you try to defang the snake you are cutting the arms. Arms have arteries and veins. they bleed profusely. People can die from that quite easily, if not quite as fast as a thrust to the brain through the eye.

Lets be honest, Defanging the snake means cutting up someone's arms to the point they cant hold something to hit u with.

That means likely more than one slash, and by the time u are done the guys arm is going to look like a hamcarved by a 7 year old with a bowie

Defanging the snake can give someone $10,000 dolars of surgery very fast.

I broke my hand in feb and i got the bill for the surgery to repair it. (jujitsu was really fun that class. I broke the thumb and seperated the pieces so i needed a Ti screw put into my hand.)

the bill was about $7000. a few good cuts to the arm is going to be more than that and can be fatal.

their is a good reason a knife is considered a lethal force impliment, reguardless of how u use it.

Thats cause a knife is a dangerously effective weapon.

If u go to court and the jury deliberates the judge IS going to instruct the Jury that a knife is a deadly weapon.

A handgun, loaded or unloaded in someone's hand pointed at you is lethal force, so a knife being used in self defence is likely to be considered the same.

Even if u have a gunting, the judge is going to instruct the jury in that manner. "a knife, opened or unopened, if used, is lethal force..." or something like that.

To convince a judge to not instruct a jury that a knife is not lethal force would require the OJ Dream Team. And the fee they charged...

I'd keep training as you do, but I'd add more thrusts to the throat, between the ribs and to the kidneys, liver and under the ribs to the lungs.

their legal, then their is staying alive.
sometime the 2 are mutualy exclusive.

Stay safe and be well.

Mitchell
 
Good response, Memnoch. When do you take the bar?

There is a saying that is often heard in my part of the country: "Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."

By the way, there is also a lot to be said for having the only story. I'm not suggesting anything, merely observing.

Nontheless, all of the foregoing aside, I can think of no state in the Union which does not permit deadly force to repel deadly force. With that said, your mileage may vary (as they say). If anyone is really concerned about situations such as that posited, and really, really wants a definitive answer, pay a local criminal attorney for 15 minutes of his time and be certain. Just a thought.
 
In CA: You can use lethal force whenever you are in fear of death or serious bodily injury. I think every situation is different. If you are a normal sized man and a giant comes at you, you may make the argument that he could do serious bodily injury to your person. I think a woman getting attacked by a man is in the same boat. Even if the badguy is unarmed, you can make the argument. Two unarmed badguys against one man, etc.

Obviously, if you "defang" the badguy and then he gets on his hands and knees and pleads for mercy, and you proceed to take him out, you will probably be convicted of murder. But if the melee happens in a few seconds and you move from defanging him to sticking the blade in his throat in a brief instant, you are in a much better position. Keep in mind that you are under no duty to run. Also, you don't have to let the other guy strike first before you choose to defend yourself. If you feel threatened with deadly force, take the initiative, strike first, and kill him. There are no black and white rules in this arena and you will always find your aberrations in the legal world. But the name of the game is to win.

Unfortunately, how "ready" you are to use lethal force often depends on how little you have to lose. A career criminal who has spent a long time in prison will probably be far more willing to go back to jail than, say, me, since I have a career, two kids, etc. He will be more willing to use lethal force in a situation that may not call for it. It really sucks that the laws are such that law abiding citizens must worry almost as much about the consequences down the road as they do about the violent confrontation at hand.

It would probably help from a defensive perspective in a court of law if you had been backed into a corner and had to fight your way out, or got cornered at your house, etc. when you used the lethal force. Then you could honestly tell the jury that you had no choice but to fight. Then again, I hate the idea of getting cornered. Remember what happened to the Clantons and McClauries when they got cornered by the Earps and Holliday. ;)
 
I think that some people from both sides of the field have forgetten that "defanging the snake" is simply a tactic ... one of many! It's a means to an end, which is to stop an attacker.

A fight is a series of opportunities and the outcome depends upon if/how you capitalize on those opportunities.

Respectfully,

Dave Fulton
 
I'll stop passing the Bar and I'll go in as soon as the Bar gets a good scotch selection. I tire of Dewers...Its so common...

Glenlivet 12 and Walker Black is the bottom line for me. I prefer Glenlivet 18 or 21, but if i have to, the 12...

Ohh, where did that spout of anality and prissyness come from.

I got to get in some range time...Freaking MASS!!!!!!!

If I bite out the throat of the next person I see wearing a Gore in '04 pin, I'll be justified.

You people know me. Don't think I wouldn't do it...

I graduate next may, so likely in 2003 or 04.

In responce to the 12 v 6 thing, Yeah, your right. U have to survive, but know your state's laws.

In some states you do not have to retreat if a "Man of Reasonably Firm constitution would not" and in others you have to retreat if you can safely do so even within your own house.

You can do everything correct once you engage, but if your state mandates retreat if u can with complete safety, and you dont, your screwed, and i dont mean by Jesica Alba (dark angel).

Think long and hard about circumstances. Wargame it out. Have the reasons for your actions listed in advance.

Physical reactions are great, but whatabout after its over.

Are you ready for an interrogation so you come off sounding like a rational individual who reacted appropriatly in horrible circumstances?

You should be.

"anything you say can and will be used against you"

In the police investigation, YOU are the scum-f--k.
YOU are the guy who they may want to put on the taxpayer's dime in a BAD FREAKY PLACE.

Q-why did you cut him as he reached toward you?

A-I feared that he was armed and was trying to close with me and going to kill me. I heard from the news the crime is on the rise, especialy violent crime and I noticed his left hand was reaching for something as he was reaching for me...I WAS SO SCARED....

(I dont want to advise you cry here. HOWEVER, Should you be overwelmed with emotion talking about this traumatic experience to the people asking, i am sure you are all sensitive people here and have sufficeint contiriton in your heart for the the evil you inflicted on the person** you hurt in lawful self defence.)

**see bottom of my post for definition of person as applied to this paragraph.

Q-why didn't you use your karate X-block to take the knife out of his hand?

A- Go to Drearic.com and look at the explination he gives on the Street V Martial arts article
at http://drearic.com/streetreality.html

" well, Karate X blocks dont really work, Mr. Prosecutor Dude, you see Dojo defences rely on 3 things:

1. Telegraphed Attacks: You see this ALL THE TIME. While some people will telegraph, most "Knife Defenses" rely on that element and that element may or may not be present. Someone who really knows how to use a knife might deliberately telegraph something in order to get you to respond in a certain way and then they will instantly change direction and/or level and cut you and once they have entered, you usually get cut and/or stabbed more than once, in fact-multiple times, in about ONE SECOND. Yes, it can happen that fast.

2. Paralyzed Body [Compliant]: This means TWO things, first of all, if you use your other hand, elbows, headbutt, knees or feet to free the knife that someone is trying to defend against, alot of Martial Arts Instructors get frustrated and tell you to stop that. Why do they do that? Very simple, because the Defense they are teaching falls apart and they cannot have that. They will make up every excuse under the sun. "People won’t do that." Yeah, OK, what if the guy DOES actively fight to retain or regain control of the weapon? What then? Well, I guess you die then.

The second part of this is, the arm is held out there for the "Defender" to execute the disarm and while this has to be done in the beginning in order to learn a principle, you still see the same element involved in advanced level "Knife Defenses." These are both of the Paralyzed Body points I wanted to make.

3. Committed Attacks: This is intrinsically linked to #1 and #2, the Non-Telegraphed Strike retracts and then cuts on withdrawal at times. See the problem and the link to the other two? When the attack is a non-committed attack, problems occur because the person and the weapon are not where you expected them to be when you expected them to be there.

One leg of the Tripod is missing, the Tripod teeters and it is weak, just as before. Understand where I’m coming from?

When an Instructor teaches a Knife Defense that relies on these things, they are setting a stage and then acting on that particular stage with those set rules and the "defense" is a success because it is a pre-arranged success and anything that enters to prohibit the "defense" is shunned by the Instructor because the "defense" then falls apart.

This is like having an internal combustion engine, you start it up and it runs just fine. Drive the car into a lake and see how the engine runs then. In one environment, the engine works, the environment it is designed to operate in. In under the water, not so good.

The analogy is direct and applicable, you lift many of the popular "knife defenses" out of their Dojo environment and they fail and drown. You take them out of the environment that they have been formulated to excel in [The Recipe] and put them in another where there are no rules and no recipe or formula is present and they fail.

"


DO NOT BE LEFT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY YOU DID SOMETHING.

You CAN get away with a LOT, If you know how to justify it.

I have little Doubt that if you were to be able to give an explination that understandable and logical as what Don wrote, you would easily get acquitted if you had to use a knife in self defence.

Provided of course, it was self defence and you didnt easclate...ect...

Don't get caught thinking that "In a court JUSTICE will prevail."
for that to happen, get a good lawyer, know why you did things and be able to give a coherent explination of your actions.

Nothing convicts a person more than his own tounge.

and above all DO NOT TRY TO EXPLAIN YOURSELF TO THE POLICE. AFTER YOU HAVE DONE WHATEVER, AND ARE IN THE POLICE CAR (OR POLICE STATION), AND THE NICE DETECTIVE COMES OVER AND ASKS WHAT HAPPENED, LOOKING ALL CONCERNED FOR YOU....

shut your mouth, ask to go to the hospital cause you feel like you are going to puke and you feel like...kinda numb.

Then call your lawyer.

No, do not try to do this on the cheap and talk your way out of it.
paying the price of a Damascus, bolstered, serated, waved CQC-8 with a framelock custom emerson(yeah, like he is going to make one REAL FAST) is worth staying out of jail.

**(person = Piece Of Shi+ - Dick Sucking - No Load - Mother Fuc+er - A$$Hole - Son Of a Bi+ch - A$$ Munching Choad)
Oh yeah, i have such nice vocabulary.
 
IMHO, knife is only on aspect of SD. The so call "de-fanging the snake" is only one of many things that you can do in a SD situation. While it is true that one stab to the offending limb will not kill the attacker, but it will most certinly stunt him/her, than how about throwing in a couple jab/hook combo or an elbow in the face. A couple of those will certainly knock someone out if u know how to throw them. And with only one stab wound to the arm, you'll probably have a better explaination to the jury than say sinking a 9" bowie down someone's neck.
 
It's my understanding that "defanging the snake" is a tactic you use at a distance. This gives the BG a chance to reconsider his attack. If he continues closing, you then go to stabbing and slashing the body, neck, and head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top