Self-defense suggestions for my wife

[strambo]

There is a big difference between knowing how to kill and having the ability...and choosing to do so. If you know how to kill, then you have a choice. If you refuse to learn how to kill, it is not possible to "choose not to kill someone." You couldn't do it anyway...no choice.

There is an instructor I heard about in a particularly violent RBSD system who states he would never kill anyone no matter what for religious reasons. That said, he fully learned and can teach all the lethal combatives techniques. This gives him the ability to understand how to take a life, and how not to by mistake. It also makes it a true chioce on his part to have the knowledge and ability and choose not to take it to that level.

As others stated, the body can train the mind. If she does get involved in a RBSD system she needs to learn all of it, not skip the lethal stuff. It will give her a lot of confidence to know she could kill, and that she can choose not to.

One critique I have of a lot of systems is they gloss over lethal techniques without fully explaining the implications. Like, they'll have a technique that includes a punch to the throat, but not say anything about it, or say "this could kill him" and leave it at that. Every lethal, or high injury strike should be fully explained from a medical perspective so the practitioner knows ahead of time what they are practicing to do. It's like when firearms instructors explain how serious blowing a hole in someone's chest is, and how long it may take them to bleed out and what it will (or will not) look like. This prepares you for the real aftermath of a shooting, not the clean Hollywood one-shot knocks him down stuff.

So, what does a throat strike do? When you forcefully strike the thryroid cartillage (Adam's apple) or the crychoid-sp? (little bone that holds the wind pipe open, just above the Adam's apple) it causes the windpipe to close off. The person will lose consiousness from O2 deprivation and slowly asphyxiate to death unless a trachiostomy is performed. It won't be pretty watching someone turn blue and die in such a fashion. Like a handgun, this is a very serious thing only to be done when your life is in danger. A non-lethal alternative is to strike the trachea below the adam's apple. This will just cause them to cough and sputter a little.

Any time you put your hands on someone it should be a serious situation...don't assume just because you are doing "non-lethal" strikes, you are in total control. What if you let your ego get the best of you and just wanna teach the jerk a lesson by hitting his trachea? You do it, he falls and fractures his skull on the pavement...ooops. Manslaughter charges, should have left the situation any way you could if leaving was an option. I welcome any EMT's, doctors to critique my explanation of the throat strike above to include terminology and spelling. If I'm off base, I want to learn the correct stuff.

Before anyone complains that I shouldn't describe stuff like that on the internet...on THR the best place to blast someone in order to achieve a "stop" is discussed frequently...deadly force is deadly force no matter the tool.

 

[tellner]

Sometimes the line between carnography and blissful ignorance can be very fine. It's important to know the implications of what you're doing in a general way. It's not necessary to go into morbid detail about just how the shock of the bullet turns tissue into jelly and bursts blood vessels. It's certainly possible to think too much which can get you killed at least as often as not thinking enough.

For working people up to a point where they can do what is needed baby steps are sometimes best. First get comfortable hitting things. Then get comfortable being in close with a large sweaty attacker. Then with the idea of doing more than causing him pain. Timing, as with so much else in fighting, is everything. There are some nasty tricks and frankly gruesome stuff I introduce in classes. It's more to gauge the students' reaction than anything else. If they laugh nervously they're normal. If they turn pale or break out with the screaming horrors it's time to back off. If they go "Cool! Can I try that?" It's time to push on.

 

[strambo]

Sometimes the line between carnography and blissful ignorance can be very fine.

Yes, I think it is important to cover what it will do to them and how it will look and sound. More detail isn't necessary.

For working people up to a point where they can do what is needed baby steps are sometimes best. First get comfortable hitting things. Then get comfortable being in close...

I was taught the opposite approach. Lethal techniques first. The reason is to get them out of their comfort zone right off the bat. The theory is it is easier to ramp down than up. If someone has time to learn in steps and get comfortable, then they might blow off the lethal stuff thinking they don't need to know it anymore, or just then realize after all this training that they can't handle knowing how to really protect themselves. Better to get it over with at the beginning.

Personally, I don't know which approach is better because I am too biased to judge. I joined the Army (Rangers) at 18 and have mostly trained with military guys. It is easy to start out talkin' lethal combatives with them. I have trained a few civilians and started out with lethal techniques and a frank discussion about it with no problems. I make sure I know exactly who I'm dealing with and that they are responsible before training with anyone.

Yes, the nervous chit-chat and laughter is indicative of a healthy response to this info. The "that's cool" comment probably is too-harmless false bravado covering up a little insecurity. I don't worry about training a sociopath or criminal by mistake. Why? Because they don't have the dedication to learn and will not make themselves available to be good training partners due to trust/ego issues. It would be evident pretty quick. Plus they don't care to improve their skills because they already don't care what their victims can do. They (victims) are just pieces of meat put on earth to be used.

I heard about a prison study where self defense tapes were shown to criminals and they were asked what they thought about potential victims knowing this stuff. The common response was they laughed and thought it would be cool if they tried it. They weren't concerned because criminals are very self-centered and short-term, immediate gratification oriented. They are only thinking about what they want from you or want to do to you. This is a generalization, but fairly accurate nonetheless. If criminals had the discipline to train or were concerned with consequences, then they would have the discipline to get a real job and concern about their future would stop them from being criminals. This is all good...it means they will underestimate you, especially women.

That said, I do not ever underestimate them. They have no compunction about violence. I always assume they'll be bigger, more of them and armed. I just don't aggree that they'll be trained or highly skilled at fighting. The success comes from aggression, not skill. How hard is it to walk up and shank someone? I've heard some trainers talk about picturing facing someone like Chuck Liddell only bigger when preparing/learning combatives. I think this leads people down the wrong path. You won't be facing a skilled superman, but a more likely few scum who will try to hurt you quick with no warning. They can be handled by alertness and injuring them first and fast (with whatever you got; gun, club, brick or body weapons) and get out of dodge.

The emphasis is on injury not method. If the origional poster's wife gets in trouble and busts the scum's knee and runs away, great. I don't care if she caused the injury with a stomp, rock, board or gun. The result is he falls down and can't chase her. I hate reading about crime victims...people can learn effective protection methods and it doesn't take years in a Dojo!

 

[dfaugh]

When I was younger I was heavily involded in the martial arts. My sensei had me teach an 8 week class on self defense. The purpose was NOT to teach the full range of karate fighting techniques, or get a "belt", but strictly to teach enough skills to handle/survive a bad situation. While I had a handful of men, 99% of the people I taught were women. When they finished the class, they were QUITE capable of disabling an attacker (even multiple attackers). And much of that was instilling the confidence to know that they COULD handle an attacker, even someone much bigger than they. While some of the techniques I taught COULD be fatal, the primary goal was to simply disable the attacker to the point where the "attackee" could get away. I'm sure if you look around, there are martial arts studios that have similar courses.

 

[LAK]

If your wife is not prepared to use a firearm or knife etc to protect herself she is not going to have the mindset - the will - to use anything else with sufficient force to stop a deadly or other serious assault.

No good news here, and I hope she never has the misfortune of learning the hard way.

-------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Barbara]

I don't think that's necessarily true. Once you're in a position where you have to do it, you may find the mindset. But you don't have the skills.

Dick, what are her thoughts about defending herself in general? Not killing someone or hurting them badly, but taking care of herself. From what you're saying, she's good with that, so go with it. See about taking (both of you) a self-defense class..something to give her the skills to get away from an attacker. If you phrase it like that, she will probably be more willing.

Don't make her go by herself, if she doesn't want to. Suggest you both go, not that she needs it more than you. If she doesn't want to go, go by yourself and see how she reacts.

 

[tellner]

I was taught the opposite approach. Lethal techniques first. The reason is to get them out of their comfort zone right off the bat.
...
Personally, I don't know which approach is better because I am too biased to judge. I joined the Army (Rangers) at 18 and have mostly trained with military guys. It is easy to start out talkin' lethal combatives with them.

There's the difference. With military recruits there's already been a selection process, training, that total training environment and preparation for shooting people specifically to kill or injure them. The civilian side is a little different.

I don't worry about training a sociopath or criminal by mistake. Why? Because they don't have the dedication to learn and will not make themselves available to be good training partners due to trust/ego issues. It would be evident pretty quick. Plus they don't care to improve their skills because they already don't care what their victims can do. They (victims) are just pieces of meat put on earth to be used.

For the most part you're right. I've met some really scary individuals. They were disciplined, motivated, rational, set on improving their skills and utterly remorseless and without conscience, the sort of person who'd make a great SS officer or corporate raider. Some of them were remarkably good at hiding their complete lack of conscience and contempt for people around them. Scary.

I heard about a prison study where self defense tapes were shown to criminals and they were asked what they thought about potential victims knowing this stuff. The common response was they laughed and thought it would be cool if they tried it. They weren't concerned because criminals are very self-centered and short-term, immediate gratification oriented. They are only thinking about what they want from you or want to do to you. This is a generalization, but fairly accurate nonetheless. If criminals had the discipline to train or were concerned with consequences, then they would have the discipline to get a real job and concern about their future would stop them from being criminals. This is all good...it means they will underestimate you, especially women.

And yet, other studies showed that many or most had broken off crimes because the victim wasn't cooperating and broke their script. A really common complaint by rapists is that the victims would start swearing at them, and that just (I quote) "wasn't ladylike". As you say, self-centered and short-term. If you can change the situation so that it isn't what they expected many will decide what you have isn't worth it. The 89 year old granny couldn't win a boxing match with the thug. But if she goes up against the weak part - his brain - there's a good chance the cost/benefit breaker will trip.

Sometimes being underestimated is good. In fact, it's a good part of my personal self-defense strategy. I've managed to prevail where I shouldn't have by appearing to be fat, slow, scared and weak right up until it's time to stop being slow, scared and weak.

The problem, once again, is that there are vicious sociopaths out there who aren't stupid and who use their heads. Often they turn their talents to other fields. A couple recent studies of stock brokers and other stock and securities traders showed that sociopathic tendencies were epidemic among the very successful.

 

[brownie0486]

Tough situation when they won't look at the possibilities and accept the risks willing to reduce them if they could in some way [ lethal or non lethal ].

My wife wouldn't listen when we first got married, she does now, and carries a gun when she feels she might need one [ like your wife showing homes would be ].

I got her to pay attention by scaring the crap out of her one night while she was walking the dog, when she would not take anything for her defense with her.

The idea before that was that the dog would protect her, it was a big akita. I jumped out of the bushes on her and had her by the throat from behind dragging her off the street. She about had a heart attack, but she pays attention, knowing the possibilities out there now.

Problem solved. Not saying thats for everyone, but it worked after she knew REAL fear for the first time and reality set in.

Brownie

 

[Monkeyleg]

Brownie, if I were to try that, I think I'd probably have at least a broken nose.

Barbara, I hope that answers your question. Debbie is tough, no doubt about it. I think her statements about not being able to kill someone, though, are her true feelings. She can't even kill a spider. Around the house, I have to play executioner of insects.

With her schedule, I doubt very much that she'd take the time to do a self-defense course of any type. I can show her some of the few things I've learned over the years, but that's probably it. Maybe that, combined with a bit of training in the use of pepper spray, will do it.

Or, maybe it will take something that scares the hell out of her to wake her up.

Her mother is the same way. However, after my father-in-law died last year, my mother-in-law no longer felt secure. The fact is, she never was secure, as she lived in the same bad area.

One day my wife came home after visiting her mom and said, "my mom wants to talk to you. She wants to get a gun--not a big gun--but a gun she can carry in her purse."

Knowing my MIL, I was certain that she would not be able to pull the trigger in the event she was attacked. So I offered other advice, the best of which was "move," which she thankfully did.

dfaugh: "They can be handled by alertness and injuring them first and fast (with whatever you got; gun, club, brick or body weapons) and get out of dodge."

That's the tactic I used when that gang of punks was trying to rob me. I went after the leader, who was also the largest of the group, and put him on the ground. The rest dispersed quickly.

I think the survival instinct is simply part of our DNA, but some people like my wife try to suppress it for a variety of reasons. And, so, they don't learn the skills or the mindset required to survive an attack, but only react when they are attacked or threatened (witness the example of my MIL). By then, though, they're already at a huge disadvantage.

Back in 1977 or so, I rented a dozen white bunnies from a pet store to use in a photo for a project. Having nowhere to put them, I locked them in the bathroom.

The next morning, when I opened the door, they were in the corner. The walls were full of holes, as they'd tried to scratch their way out.

When I approached the bundle of bunnies, they began to screech and bear their teeth. I'm not kidding when I say that the screeching was so ferocious that it scared me.

I know the bunny story sounds funny, but it's just another example of how the survival instinct is present even in creatures we consider to be docile.

 

[James T Thomas]

reflections

I'm not sure of this, but you did ask for suggestions.

Purchase a police scanner radio and set it for your home area. Place it in your home where your wife, and kids, can hear "what's going on", all around them. It is one thing to know that there are risks, and another thing to hear the reality of it; sometimes in "real time."
I would surmise that over time your wife will gain a deeper appreciation for the dark side of life, and perhaps this will cause her to rethink.

Also, I would inquire at any office parties, chance meetings, etc. that you may have with her co-workers to find some who have had bad experiences.
You might convince one of them to at least discuss what happened with your wife. She may become so empathetic that she could reconsider also. Especially if one of the realators has had a truly terrible experience.
You never know until you discretely inquire. There may have even been a murder or so, within her own company in the past. It would most likely be kept confidential. That is, not common knowledge. The owner would certainly want it not to be commonly known.

Lastly, what might your wife do, if you would capriciously decide that you too, will from now on go unarmed, at night, or whatever risky situations you may personnaly face?
Discuss with her how you will take out insurance on yourself so that she will be provided for; and therefor, she need not worry or be concerned.

 

[strambo]

And yet, other studies showed that many or most had broken off crimes because the victim wasn't cooperating and broke their script.

Exactly, this is the other side of the coin that makes self defense possible. The 2 studies are apples and oranges and need to be viewed together.

The study I mentioned establishes that the average criminal does not care what the "victim" is capable of...therefore they do not come up with strategies to counter effective resistance. They only concentrate on what they want to do. The only exception is firearms, they understand the immediate consequence of an armed "victim."

Your study is the other side. It speaks to the reality of resistance to violent crime. Criminals are unprepared for effective resistance which is why it works. It throws off their game plan. If they thought you could resist effectively, then they would have picked someone they thought couldn't. The only exception is if a male gets themselves into a macho type incident where the criminal wants to take you out because his rep is on the line and you challenged him. This is outside of "normal" crime and victim selection and is probably rare and pretty avoidable. In this case the criminal will expect resistance, but still obviously thinks they can handle it.

It is because criminals don't expect their chosen victim's to be able to put up effective resistance that gives the potential "victim" the window of opportunity to do just that. That's how a 100lb lady can handle a 200 man. She uses her window to INJURE him and split before he can regain composure and any physical ability he has left. You never want to "fight" someone. You never want to find out how skilled they are. Don't give them the chance to use whatever strength and skill they have by injuring them ASAP. Then it's your strength and skill vs an injured man, (say a busted ankle) easier problem.

Monkeyleg, just makes sure she believes that she can effectively protect herself and she doesn't have to kill anyone. She can concentrate on everything but lethal techniques if it will make her feel better.

 

[brownie0486]

Monkeyleg;

I hold SD classes specifically designed for the snowbirds [ read older ] people who live here during the winter months, as well as a all womans SD course specifically set up with techniques they can use effectively.

One course was real estate women, contact being made through SAR connections. The "leader" of this group was telling me she was always watching the "client" when alone with them showing the house.

I asked her if she let them get within a few feet of her as when signing papers on a counter, etc while in the house, and she said yes, but she was vigiliant enough to be able to back off if they showed any aggression.

At that point, I grabbed her around the neck with both hands and picked her up on her toes. The look on her face was priceless, totoal fear, frozen in place, panic stricken.

I let her go, and asked her what she thought about how fast she could become a victim alone in the homes with male clients if they so chose to harm her.

She didn't know what to say, she didn't think anyone could move that fast with their hands and she stated she thought she would always be able to react somehow [ which she found was not going to happen or keep her safe in anyway ].

She carried mace and said she thought that would always be enough until the class. The ladies learned a lot that day, one of the biggest was awareness of their space and keeping people out of it.

That course, and her telling others about the incident in training has brought lots of calls for training by others. In both examples [ this woman and my wife ], they were shown real fear for the first time with physically assaulting them. It changed their views cery quickly about what they need to do to stay safe while on their own.

Better to have them experience this in scenarios, when neither had advance warning of any training scenario and felt panic, fear and being helpless, really really in trouble, than for them to get that feeling while some stranger is about to serious harm or kill them.

When they almost wet their pants in fear and panic under physical assault, they understand this is not TV land anymore. It's their life or death, and they choose to minimize the risks or they choose to be sheep and hope they never run into the wolf.

Brownie

 

[Monkeyleg]

Thanks again for all the replies. Lots of good points here.

I just got back from accompanying my wife on an apartment showing. As usual, the prospective tenants didn't show.

It's been several years since I've been to the apartment building. Having now seen the neighborhood again, there's no way that I'm going to let Debbie do the showings alone or without some training and OC spray.

I've seen worse neighborhoods, but not by much.

On a side note: For a number of reasons, I keep my .45 with a full magazine but an empty chamber when in the house. When I cycled the slide to chamber a round, I got a feed failure, as I short-cycled the slide. Either that, or the round I was trying to chamber has been in and out of the chamber too often.

I guess my level of preparedness isn't what it should be, either.

 

[LAK]

Barbara

I don't think that's necessarily true. Once you're in a position where you have to do it, you may find the mindset. But you don't have the skills.

Not necessarily - but very often. And often enough. A very common element in violent assaults is that of surprize. In order to be objective about self defense one must really be prepared to counter attack immediately before - having recognized it - or during the first few seconds of the assault. One's chances generally diminish as seconds and minutes pass

In the case of a physically disadvantaged defender - the average man (or men) on woman assault - the defender has the odds heavily stacked against them. Lacking a decisive weapon (be it a proficiency in an unarmed martial art or tool), the opportunity, skills and will to use it - they are counting on "luck".

------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[tanksoldier]

If she's not willing to act to defend her life, then all the martial arts training in the world won't help.

If she's willing to go, that's great. Exposure to martial philosoply may adjust her attitude over time.

Until she's willing to defend herself you'll just have to rely on the screening process and her instincts to keep her out of the situation in the first place.

 

[Monkeyleg]

I thought that all who have posted on this thread might find the following interesting, funny, depressing, or a combination of the three.

Last night a friend of ours called to talk to my wife, who was out watering flowers.

I started telling him about my concerns with her showing apartments alone and defenseless.

He said, "Dick, why are you being so paranoid all the time. She'll be fine. She has a cell phone with her, and she can just run out the door if something happens."

This is the same friend who got mugged just three weeks ago. He was leaving his favorite bar at closing time, and took a shortcut through the parking structure at the Milwaukee School of Engineering.

The last thing he remembers hearing was a group of youths on skateboards, and one of them saying, "OK, give it all up."

He woke up the next day in the hospital, with a mild concussion, some bruised ribs, and some other cuts and bruises.

They took his wallet, his expensive jewelry, and anything else of value.

If he weren't my friend, I would have pointed out the obvious irony of his statement. I just didn't feel like pouring salt in the wound.

 

[gezzer]

She has the victim mindset and has been assimilated by the mass idiots.

You must show or scare her to get her to realize her life and family is worth more than the scumbag who is going to not only rape her repeatedly but physically torture her to death. Then the perp will go on to do another.

Show her the mindset to not be able to kill anyone to save your own life or family is the sickest mindset of all.

If she cannot be changed I am sorry but if my wife she would be down the road as I will not tolerate a mother who will not protect her own children.

 

[brownie0486]

In this case, tough love is called for if she can not be convinced she is in danger and needs to act and preempt problems with forethought.

If it were my wife, I'd have a contact make an appointment to be shown a place and have him take it to the limit. No I won't go into how far that would be, but you can bet she'd either stop showing places alone, be real anxious to change her thinking and ways, or we'd be divorced.

It's sad to hear that there are people living with those who know better than to let this happen, and refuse to get their head out of the sand. I feel sorry for you sir, you don't seem willing to take it to the next level, and she probably on't budge without that unput.

Good luck in your endeavor to keep her safe. If anything happens, I'd rather not hear about it here on this forum, okay?

Brownie

 

[Monkeyleg]

brownie0486: "Good luck in your endeavor to keep her safe. If anything happens, I'd rather not hear about it here on this forum, okay?"

Trust me, sir: if anything happens to my wife, you won't read about it here on THR, in the newspapers, or anywhere else. Nor will you read about what happens to the perp.

While I understand your mindset regarding self-defense, because I share pretty much that same mindset, I find your comment(s) bordering on the offensive.

Sorry if I can't just snap my fingers and turn my wife into a cold killer like you, pal. It's taken years to bring her as far as I have.

 

[brownie0486]

I find your comment(s) bordering on the offensive

Thats unfortunate as it's reality, hard as it is.

Just so we are on the same page, your wife doesn't have to be a "cold killer" as you so eloquently put it. My wife isn't that either, but she has been schooled in the hard lessons and came around to a mindest of knowing her particular vulnerabilities and then taking actions to correct those issues If she had not, I would have considered my own safety and security compromised.

Thats not ever going to happen in my lifetime, for you see, I'm not alive by accident, and there are too many people out there who are. Thats all well and dandy with me, to each their own, but not when their decisions affect my safety and security.

Brownie

 

[Monkeyleg]

Brownie, the comments you made that I took offense to were that, if my wife ever became a victim, you wouldn't want to read about it here on THR.

The intent of my reply, in saying that you would never read about such an event on THR, are twofold: 1), I wouldn't want the incident publicized and; 2) I wouldn't want some civil court looking into the incident, should the perp wind up dead.

And I sure as hell wouldn't want comments I've made on THR to be used as testimony against me.

You live in a state where it's legal to carry firearms for self-defense. My wife and I live in one of just two states where it's illegal for anyone but law officers to carry.

"Thats not ever going to happen in my lifetime, for you see, I'm not alive by accident, and there are too many people out there who are."

If you read some of my past posts on THR, TFL and other forums, I think you'll find that I am not alive by accident, either.

And it is by no means an "accident" that I've spent hundreds and hundreds of hours over the past five years trying to get a CCW bill passed in WI.

I thank God for your freedom. Please pray to God that we get that same freedom here in WI next year.

 

[Barbara]

I can't believe some of you are suggesting either terrifying her or divorcing her because she doesn't want to shoot someone. Good lord, people. Who is the enemy here?

It does make me remember why I own a gun, though. People scare the hell out of me.

 

[Knotthead]

Here's an idea.

Does your wife carry a cell phone with a camera? What if she took a picture of prospective tenants upon meeting them and sent it to a secure location? How does everyone else here feel about this as a deterrence?

 

[22-rimfire]

Pretty tough call. My wife is in a similar situation. She can't stand guns. I doubt that she believes that someone would hurt her.....

Unfortunately, until something happens that really frightens them, I doubt there is a solution. The speed that these things can happen is scarey.

If I were her and would not carry any weapons (ie. gun), I would consider a large mag-lite flashlight which can be useful for assisting prospective tenants in seeing into places like closets etc. She just has to redefine her "routine" to include a potential weapon. She could attach her keys to the flash light. She certainly won't leave them lying around.

 

[brownie0486]

Brownie, the comments you made that I took offense to were that, if my wife ever became a victim, you wouldn't want to read about it here on THR.

I apologize if you took offense to that comment sir. I made the comment solely on the fact that many people regularly relate personal incidents in their life on boards, and I personally would not want to hear anything happened to her. I understand about the civil comment.

Good luck in your state getting ccw, and thanks for the dedication to seeing that happens, it benefits everyone concerned in other states to keep that which they have already. The politicians and anti's are ever ready to take that away if they can in the states that have it now.

I can't believe some of you are suggesting either terrifying her or divorcing her because she doesn't want to shoot someone. Good lord, people. Who is the enemy here?

Barbara, taking steps to stay safe does not necessarily mean carrying a gun, though that is one option.

I believe I took an oath to protect my wife during our vows. It is an obligation to do just that IMO. Terrifying her? Yes, in a way you can look at it as a controlled environment where rage and fear are introduced. Experiences like that in life have a way of changing people opinions about vulnerability and how best to take steps to never go through something similiar again.

It's about changing physical and mental priorities based on knowledge, education and ones experiences. It's about not having my wife learn the hard way, learning too late that she made the wrong decisions about her situation, safety and knowing too late she could have changed the course of history [ perhaps ].

It's no different that anyone who has been through a Marine Corps boot camp [ at least back in my day ]. They terrorized you mentally, mercilessly day in and day out. They prepared you to fight for your life and gave you the skills necessary to win in battle.

Make no mistake, any woman or man who is attacked had better be able to handle the mental stress of that attack, be able to work through the terror and fear, of life and death, as well be physically capable of surviving that battle.

Good lord, people. Who is the enemy here?

If you feel I'm the enemy because I chose a controlled environ to educate my own wife when she didn't understand the dangers and wouldn't listen, too bad. Thats not what is important to me.

What IS important is that my wife would disagree with you at this point and I'm living with her, not you. Easy lessons are soon forgotten, it's the hard lessons we tend to remember. She relates that story to others ocassionally now and has no hard feelings about my actions, in fact, she realizes that due to my actions, solely based on her not willing to accept her vulnerability by the way, that she is safer, more vigilant, and more careful about her surroundings.

That may not keep her from harm one day either, but I'll have done everything I could toward her awareness of danger in her environ and both her mental attitude/preparation to not give up and just be a willing victim or accept it as some destiny [ as much as can be expected ], and taking steps to protect herself physically.

I owe her that with my own background in this field. I would consider it negligent and wanton disregard for her safety to not do so. You, on the other hand, may look at it as some monster, cruel or abusive, and consider me "the enemy". Thats your perogative and I'll repsect that opinion you hold.

Brownie