Hand Combat Equal Importance to Firearm Training?

[robinkevin]

Seems I'm not the only oldster here trying to take the youngsters to task. And at least one youngster mentioned a 60 year old defending himself. Well I'm sure there are 60 year olds that can. But for the rest of us, I'd like to remind the kids out there of one very simple and long proven trueism.

"Experience and treachery will overcome youth and strength every time". Or has oft been said, "Never pick a fight with an old guy. He can't whip you, so he'll just kill you".

Very true. My old man is 70 years old this year and not near the shape he use to be. But he stays active on the farm and I would not to this day want to go up against him. When he was in his mid to late 50's I witness him beat a guy 20 years younger than himself. Now he boxed a lot when he was younger and that training is what makes him how he is today.

 

[Kendahl]

Except for dumb luck, a bigger man will always beat a smaller man with the same level of fitness and training. A medium sized man in great shape and with excellent training may be able to hold his own against a big man. But that won't be enough for a small man. If you are small, unathletic and elderly, you are dead meat in hand to hand combat. The whole point of being armed is that it neutralizes your assailant's advantage of size, strength and skill.

 

[Goosey]

How many of you think hand combat training is just as important as firearm training?

Much more important seeing as I can't carry a gun... besides, one is more likely to get in a scrap with some drunk guy than have someone make a serious attempt on their life.

 

[easyg]

My old man is 70 years old this year and not near the shape he use to be. But he stays active on the farm and I would not to this day want to go up against him.

If you watch boxing, MMA competitions, kick boxing, etc...
You will not see any 50+ year old fighters in the ring.

Age takes its toll on everyone.
Old men, even ones in exceptional physical condition, just can't compete with young guys when it comes to fighting, unless the young guy is either a complete idiot or especially weak and feeble.

 

[robinkevin]

If you watch boxing, MMA competitions, kick boxing, etc...
You will not see any 50+ year old fighters in the ring.

Age takes its toll on everyone.
Old men, even ones in exceptional physical condition, just can't compete with young guys when it comes to fighting, unless the young guy is either a complete idiot or especially weak and feeble.

I am not talking about competition, I am simply talking about basic self defense in such cases that do not require lethal force, or for firearm retention. Most people really don't have any hand to hand fighting skills and a young man with good skill will whip the snot out of a 20 year old who is throwing hay makers.

If you go watch MMA or Kickboxing also notice how long most of the fights last. You can't just end the fight with one blow as the fans want a show. Older men don't have the stamina for an extended fight in most cases, aren't as fast as they once was, but let me tell you and many of older men will tell you this as well. They may not be as good as they once was, but are good once as they ever was.

I can't believe this thread has became all about age and people looking for reasons why they don't need hand to hand skills.

 

[easyg]

but let me tell you and many of older men will tell you this as well. They may not be as good as they once was, but are good once as they ever was.

This sounds great, but it's simply not true.
If an old man is "as good once as he ever was" then he was never really that good to start with.

I can't believe this thread has became all about age and people looking for reasons why they don't need hand to hand skills.

I think you are misunderstanding what is being said.
No one here has said that they don't need hand to hand skills.
The original topic made the argument that hand to hand skills are of equal importance as handgun skills.
And I disagree.
Older and weaker people are NOT going to be able to successfully defend themselves from younger and stronger people no matter how many hours they spend in a martial arts class.
But a firearm allows the possibility for the old and the weak to stop even the strongest and most well trained attacker.

 

[robinkevin]

Ok you got me one the saying good as I once was but for the most part with age comes wisdom. You can disagree all you want but I have seen enough to know better. You take a old boxer for example. Their footwork isn't as good as it use to be, their hands not as fast, they can't take the hits they once did. However they have learn how to avoid hits, and they only need to land one to end the fight cause they haven't forgotten how to punch.

Also as someone said above it's much more likely one will be in a scrap with some drunk guy then to face a threat on their life in which lethal force is needed.

 

[Nushif]

Also as someone said above it's much more likely one will be in a scrap with some drunk guy then to face a threat on their life in which lethal force is needed.

Probably the best argument here.

I may be legally justified in shooting anyone who physically attacks me, since they *may* want to kill me with their bare hands, highly inebriated and being held back by their girlfriend or some buddies, but I'm not sure that'll *always* stand up in court. It certainly doesn't stand up to my conscience.

 

[Owen Sparks]

This thread reminds me of something that happened in the locker room at the gym. I was getting dressed after using the steam room when one of the members was asking me a few questions about the self-defense class we teach. Another guy who is a bit of a blow hard interjected himself in the conversation with a tired old joke. He stated "I don't need all that karate BS, I am a black belt in the martial art of click clack and from seven yards I can...I stopped him right there and said "Let's see how fast you can DRAW" as I lunged towards him in a mock charge. His eyes got as big as saucers because for a second he did not know that I was kidding. Of course everyone there got a good laugh out of my antics. I then turned to the potential student and said. All the pistols and permits in the World will not do you any good if all you are wearing is a wet towel. Tansu goes with you everywhere, even the shower and you don't need a seven yard head start either.

 

[Old krow]

I can't believe this thread has became all about age and people looking for reasons why they don't need hand to hand skills.

That's because they don't "need" HTH skills. I don't "need" to carry a gun. I choose to carry a gun. It's an exercise of freewill and "need" isn't in the equation... at least the majority of the time.

If I were reading this as someone that had never owned a gun and was interested I would resign to carrying pepper spray.

I need HTH skills.
I need basic medical training.
I need 3 firearms classes each year.
I need to carry 5 magazines.
What else do I need? Kevlar?

Also as someone said above it's much more likely one will be in a scrap with some drunk guy then to face a threat on their life in which lethal force is needed.

Probably the best argument here.

Hand to hand combat definitely has its place, but, in the end, when you enter a fight with a gun, you are now in a gun fight. You are so because you brought it to the fight. Fighting a drunk guy while you are carrying sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

 

[sidheshooter]

If you watch boxing, MMA competitions, kick boxing, etc...
You will not see any 50+ year old fighters in the ring.

Age takes its toll on everyone.
Old men, even ones in exceptional physical condition, just can't compete with young guys when it comes to fighting, unless the young guy is either a complete idiot or especially weak and feeble.

There are always exceptions. The young guy underneath an almost-50 Herschel Walker would probably disagree with you.

MMA sportsmanship aside, one can remain competent at basic combative techniques into advancing years, it just requires more work, and more practice compensating for whatever health issues that may crop up along the way.

 

[Nushif]

Fighting a drunk guy while you are carrying sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

I find fighting at any time, anywhere to be a recipe for disaster, but at a certain point I have to make choices, such as "Do I shoot this guy for being an angry drunk?"

 

[robMaine]

Except for dumb luck, a bigger man will always beat a smaller man with the same level of fitness and training. A medium sized man in great shape and with excellent training may be able to hold his own against a big man. But that won't be enough for a small man. If you are small, unathletic and elderly, you are dead meat in hand to hand combat. The whole point of being armed is that it neutralizes your assailant's advantage of size, strength and skill.

Tell that to my buddy who works the door at clubs at 5'5" 140lbs, even I am only 5'10" 200lbs, I have to approach much larger and stronger men every night I work and ask them to leave, sometimes ending up wrestling them out.

 

[kcshooter]

Getting into a physical altercation while carrying a weapon is just stupid. You are using deadly force either way. You don't know what the guy you are fighting is capable of. There's many cases of normal sized men being completely disabled by one punch.
Grappling with someone when you have a firearm on you is a great way to give a gun to the other guy.

Walk away. If you are prevented from escaping the situation, you're being threatened with eminent and grave bodily harm. If you are prevented from escaping the situation, you're justified in using force. Force is force.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be in shape and able to fight in a conflict. Part of an armed conflict may involve HTH skills. This, however, should be something you try to avoid.

Carrying a weapon means you have to make decisions wisely. If you can't just walk away from someone taunting you because of your ego, you lack the maturity to responsibly carry a firearm.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Your first indication that you are in a physical altercation may be a sucker punch coming at your face, a head lock from behind or when the bad guy climbs in the front seat of your car and you better know how to deal with it. Criminal assaults often come as a complete surprise participation is not voluntary. Case in point, a buddy recently got jumped in the bathroom of a bar and beat unconscious in a case of mistaken identity. He was coming out of the stall and the last thing he remembered is someone yelling “THAT”S HIM!”

 

[robinkevin]

Getting into a physical altercation while carrying a weapon is just stupid. You are using deadly force either way. You don't know what the guy you are fighting is capable of. There's many cases of normal sized men being completely disabled by one punch.
Grappling with someone when you have a firearm on you is a great way to give a gun to the other guy.

Walk away. If you are prevented from escaping the situation, you're being threatened with eminent and grave bodily harm. If you are prevented from escaping the situation, you're justified in using force. Force is force.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be in shape and able to fight in a conflict. Part of an armed conflict may involve HTH skills. This, however, should be something you try to avoid.

Carrying a weapon means you have to make decisions wisely. If you can't just walk away from someone taunting you because of your ego, you lack the maturity to responsibly carry a firearm.

There's more to it than that. It's not about just walking away it's about being attacked. I don't think anyone here is talking about picking a fight or not trying to avoid it. The issues lies in how much force do you want to use. If someone swings at me I will have them in a wrist lock, before I even know what I am doing. It's a second natural response after many years of training. My firearm would not be at risk during that, if so than cops are at a huge risk when they handcuff people of loosing their weapons and they should just shoot everyone. I don't think so...

The fact is high percentage of attacks, the attacker has no weapon. Knives are more common than firearms. The likely hood you may have a knife in your side before you know it is a lot more likely then someone drawing on you from a distance of 7 yards. So guess what, now that knife is in your side your firearm is useless by the time you draw it you are stabbed. So what hand to hand skills are you going to put to use to either A. End the threat. B. Make distance in order to drawn your sidearm or C. To retain your weapon as the upon pressing the knife against your side the attackers has discover you are packing...

Now ideally they should never get that close to you. Myself I get uncomfortable in crowds and keep my back to walls if in a crowded area, however not everyone does. Most don't even think about it, that too comes from training.

 

[kcshooter]

If someone swings at me I will have them in a wrist lock, before I even know what I am doing.

Unless they are faster, stronger, and better trained than you. The folly of youth is thinking that you can't lose a fight.

People don't generally just start swinging without some sort of incident preceding the swing. (Sure, it happens, but I can't imagine that it's anything but extremely rare). The goal is to already be gone before it comes to that. That's where ego's come into play. If someone can't bring them self to just walk away, they aren't mature enough to carry a firearm.

 

[Old krow]

My firearm would not be at risk during that, if so than cops are at a huge risk when they handcuff people of loosing their weapons and they should just shoot everyone. I don't think so...

Comparing a civilian that is carrying a concealed gun to a cop is a stretch along the magnitude of calling VPC a firearms activist group. Cops have backup and typically use it when hand cuffing someone.

Case in point, a buddy recently got jumped in the bathroom of a bar and beat unconscious in a case of mistaken identity.

That's a very good point, except that it matters more to the young folks than it does to older folks. I don't typically hang out in bar where testosterone is the flavor of the night. Nobody wants to grab my girlfriends derriere. I haven't been in a physical alteration (that wasn't part of work) since before Clinton got elected... the first time.

 

[mortablunt]

Hand to hand ought to be taught before gun skills. Almost all SD shootings are at very close range; as in reach our and bop the other guy on the nose range. The ability to create range aand space to use a gun is vital. Even just some basic grapple training can really make a big difference. The gun is the best weapon because it negates physical strength. H2H is essential so that one can prevent physical strength from ever being used to negate the gun. It also helps with making sure that the weapon cannot be used against you.

Just a few basic fundamentals can make all the difference. Case in point: I'm not physically imposing. I stand 5'5" and I weigh 160 pounds. I have a bit of gut and not a lot of cut muscle. I'm not that strong either. However, I managed to successfully outfight my friend 3 times in a row last night. He's about 6 feet tall, 190 pounds, and has a lot of muscle. He's also a high school baseball player and a very good batter. However, I know some basics about grappling, so I managed to defeat him 3 times in a row despite having a massive physical disadvantage. I've learned Tae Kwon Do and Sambo. Sambo is about as practical and brutal as MA styles get. I recommend it greatly. It even works very well against my ripped hulking 6'3" brother.

P.S.: A lot of MMA stuff and "street fighting" seminars aren't actually all that great. And being a 5'th dan back belt isn't half so great as possessing just basic grappling skills and a firearm.

Of course, the best way to handle a fight is to avoid it entirely.

Sambo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ebmQJ3-aEY
Tae Kwon Do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20zBbzyRxHo

 

[easyg]

So guess what, now that knife is in your side your firearm is useless by the time you draw it you are stabbed.

Just because you have been stabbed that does not mean that the gun in your hand is now useless.

So what hand to hand skills are you going to put to use to either A. End the threat. B. Make distance in order to drawn your sidearm or C. To retain your weapon as the upon pressing the knife against your side the attackers has discover you are packing...

Unless my attacker is Dr. Octopus, he cannot hold me, hold the knife in me, and control both of my arms all at the same time.

 

[JustinJ]

Quote:
If someone swings at me I will have them in a wrist lock, before I even know what I am doing.

Unless they are faster, stronger, and better trained than you. The folly of youth is thinking that you can't lose a fight.

Exactly. Again, no matter how good one can fight there are certainly many who can fight better. If one believes he can counter any punch thrown there is much money to be had in mma. In reality most will earn little more than a reduced IQ.

 

[robinkevin]

There is in fact ALWAYS someone better... but that can be say with anything.

 

[JustinJ]

There is in fact ALWAYS someone better... but that can be say with anything.

True, but i also wouldn't tell somebody to expect to be able to outrun all criminal attackers or beat them in banjo duels.

 

[Deanimator]

I don't consider unarmed self-defense "less lethal".

I consider it "DIFFERENTLY lethal".

I'm 54 and have two bad shoulders. I'm not playing around with somebody who commits a felonious assault against me. Whatever I do to you to neutralize the threat is going to be probably going to be profoundly harmful to you, whether it's a bullet in the head or my thumbs in your eye sockets up to my elbows.

Don't like that, don't attack me.

 

[robinkevin]

True, but i also wouldn't tell somebody to expect to be able to outrun all criminal attackers or beat them in banjo duels.

My point exactly they are also likely to be a better draw, better aim and faster shot than you should they also have a firearm. so it's taking the chance no matter which defense you go with.

But either way this thread has gotten so off topic I am pretty much done with it.