JoeBlackSpade
New member
Nice links gents!
Self Defense article
- Thread starter divemedic
- Start date
I have been to that mall plenty of times and have already commented on this locally. The old man was an idiot. He is lucky to be alive.
You do not volunteer to engage in combat unarmed with someone 40 years your junior and armed with a tire iron. He got out of the car he was in to do this.
The man is made out as a hero because the media loves to hype the 1 in 100 who oppose an armed criminal unarmed and prevail. Of course the numerous people beaten and left for dead get a single mention in the media at the time of the crime but this guy will be held up again and again as a shining example... of stupidity.
You do not volunteer to engage in combat unarmed with someone 40 years your junior and armed with a tire iron. He got out of the car he was in to do this.
The man is made out as a hero because the media loves to hype the 1 in 100 who oppose an armed criminal unarmed and prevail. Of course the numerous people beaten and left for dead get a single mention in the media at the time of the crime but this guy will be held up again and again as a shining example... of stupidity.
glock glockler
New member
Musketeer,
While his actions might not make sense for you they might be perfectly logical for him. You might risk quite a bit by doing something like that but if all he has to look forward to are days of Geritol and Depends standing up to a punk might be the best thing he's done in a decade.
If more people were willing to take a risk to preserve honor we'd all be better off.
While his actions might not make sense for you they might be perfectly logical for him. You might risk quite a bit by doing something like that but if all he has to look forward to are days of Geritol and Depends standing up to a punk might be the best thing he's done in a decade.
If more people were willing to take a risk to preserve honor we'd all be better off.
Sorry glock glocker but no. He was obviously healthy enough to get out of that cr and engage in some form of physical confrontation. It does not sound like he was in a condition where he was waiting for death to take him from his sufferring.
He put himself in mortal danger by exiting the several thousand pounds of protection, escape and if need be weapon, in order to go mano y mano with a tire iron armed thug. Brave? Fine, he was brave. Stupid? Beyond a Doubt!
He put himself in mortal danger by exiting the several thousand pounds of protection, escape and if need be weapon, in order to go mano y mano with a tire iron armed thug. Brave? Fine, he was brave. Stupid? Beyond a Doubt!
"preserve honor"? What a bunch of BS. Over-reaction to loss of honor or being dissed is best left to the young and dumb.
to tie this in with this thread, this is exactly the type of nonsense that I believe this so-called self defense classes promote. Keep as many things as possible between you and the bad guy. Buildings are best, a car or two is good, a car door is better than nothing.
to tie this in with this thread, this is exactly the type of nonsense that I believe this so-called self defense classes promote. Keep as many things as possible between you and the bad guy. Buildings are best, a car or two is good, a car door is better than nothing.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Thread is going nowhere. Just a bunch of blather now.
The main point was whether the course would be useful. Some here deny it for irrational reasons that Pax, Mas and others point out.
Let the lean, mean fighting machines not send their kids to self-defense courses and let's be done with it.
It's called evolution.
The main point was whether the course would be useful. Some here deny it for irrational reasons that Pax, Mas and others point out.
Let the lean, mean fighting machines not send their kids to self-defense courses and let's be done with it.
It's called evolution.
glock glockler
New member
If preserving his life is the primary objective his course of action was not the wisest but at that point he might have valued his dignity more, it's his choice. Just because you or I might choose different values or manners to achieve them doesn't mean his should be regarded as stupid.
He chose to fight back and I'm glad he did.
He chose to fight back and I'm glad he did.
Justme ~
And about the article I posted above? Was that "nonsense" and "BS" too? The homeowner was definitely going to die. He went for the disarm. He got injured, but he didn't die.
Disarms are dangerous. If you go for one you might get killed. There are some situations, however, where if you don't go for one you will definitely get killed.
Maybe getting killed beats definitely getting killed, any day of the week.
pax
And about the article I posted above? Was that "nonsense" and "BS" too? The homeowner was definitely going to die. He went for the disarm. He got injured, but he didn't die.
Disarms are dangerous. If you go for one you might get killed. There are some situations, however, where if you don't go for one you will definitely get killed.
Maybe getting killed beats definitely getting killed, any day of the week.
pax
Pax,
I don't think there is anybody saying you can't learn good techniques or that a woman can never physically oppose a man. I, and others, simlpy believe that given the dedication the average person is going to put towards study and continued practice combined with the average lack of resolve in most of the "sheep like" populance that training time is better spent focused on observation, avoidance and evasion.
The isolated case of a lucky 74 year old man against a tire iron weilding thirty something does not establish the rule. Most citizens will loose that encounter.
I don't think there is anybody saying you can't learn good techniques or that a woman can never physically oppose a man. I, and others, simlpy believe that given the dedication the average person is going to put towards study and continued practice combined with the average lack of resolve in most of the "sheep like" populance that training time is better spent focused on observation, avoidance and evasion.
The isolated case of a lucky 74 year old man against a tire iron weilding thirty something does not establish the rule. Most citizens will loose that encounter.
It is usually best to assume any argument put forward in a internet discussion is not an absolute unless it is explicitly stated as such.
Added by Musketeer!
I always try to make a point of qualifying my statements. I am an engineer and heavily involved in sales for a manufacturing company. For that reason I have to qualify statements and avoid unintentional absolutes. After years of head-butting though I have come to realize the vast majority of people out there do not qualify their statements as not absolute even though they really think of them as not absolute. The result is a horrible amount of missunderstanding and finger pointing. Before calling BS on someone and starting the war that is to follow I either assume the statement is not meant as absolute or ask for clarification on the point. When one attacks another's position, even if it was poorly stated as an unintentional absolute, human hubris kicks in and people doggedly stick to their position. Only when the statement is positively reinforced as absolute do I accept it as such. "We gaurentee delivery of product starting Oct 11 leaving our facility" for example.
Added by Musketeer!
I always try to make a point of qualifying my statements. I am an engineer and heavily involved in sales for a manufacturing company. For that reason I have to qualify statements and avoid unintentional absolutes. After years of head-butting though I have come to realize the vast majority of people out there do not qualify their statements as not absolute even though they really think of them as not absolute. The result is a horrible amount of missunderstanding and finger pointing. Before calling BS on someone and starting the war that is to follow I either assume the statement is not meant as absolute or ask for clarification on the point. When one attacks another's position, even if it was poorly stated as an unintentional absolute, human hubris kicks in and people doggedly stick to their position. Only when the statement is positively reinforced as absolute do I accept it as such. "We gaurentee delivery of product starting Oct 11 leaving our facility" for example.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Is there any empirical evidence that:
1. Such courses make women overconfident
2. That such courses have led to more bad outcomes than positive one in incidents.
If not, I regard the speculation as more of a projective personality test about attitudes towards young women.
A look at the real literature on the issue demonstrates success in interactions and increased self-confidence. There is no evidence of overconfidence and excessive risk taking.
1. Such courses make women overconfident
2. That such courses have led to more bad outcomes than positive one in incidents.
If not, I regard the speculation as more of a projective personality test about attitudes towards young women.
A look at the real literature on the issue demonstrates success in interactions and increased self-confidence. There is no evidence of overconfidence and excessive risk taking.
Meyer,
Is there any "empirical evidence" supporting your view? I'm not talking about the anecdotes, hype, and general wishful thinking being advanced here. What is the "real literature," how were these studies conducted, and who did them? Did they look at any failures or simply selected success stories? What were the sample sizes and how were the populations selected? I'm fascinated by the possibility that there are detailed studies showing that two-day classes to young women who admitted to being unmotivated to go on their own have produced such unmitigated success.
Is there any "empirical evidence" supporting your view? I'm not talking about the anecdotes, hype, and general wishful thinking being advanced here. What is the "real literature," how were these studies conducted, and who did them? Did they look at any failures or simply selected success stories? What were the sample sizes and how were the populations selected? I'm fascinated by the possibility that there are detailed studies showing that two-day classes to young women who admitted to being unmotivated to go on their own have produced such unmitigated success.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
HP - go to the scholarly data bases in the criminological literature. Go to the meetings of the American Society for Criminology, etc. I've looked at these searching on self-defense training, victimology, women, and the intersection. I find NO studies that report over-confidence leading to risk taking from self-defense courses and/or more negative outcomes from women who took such courses as compared to not - when they were attacked.
If you want to search the literature to find contrary evidence - go right ahead. Head for the local library or the databases on the web.
The amazing analogy is that the antiwomen training folk sound remarkably like the antigunners who know that CCW will lead to blood in the streets.
Hasn't been found.
With all the studies on victimology, we would see a trend for risk to women. The studies on self-defense report positive results.
Bah - getting cranky in my old age. I see nothing in this thread but misogyny.
If you want to search the literature to find contrary evidence - go right ahead. Head for the local library or the databases on the web.
The amazing analogy is that the antiwomen training folk sound remarkably like the antigunners who know that CCW will lead to blood in the streets.
Hasn't been found.
With all the studies on victimology, we would see a trend for risk to women. The studies on self-defense report positive results.
Bah - getting cranky in my old age. I see nothing in this thread but misogyny.
"Empirical evidence" will prove very elusive here. Such courses give training, new knowledge. Case by case analysis is impossible, because only a fraction of those trained will ever use such techniques. It is simply subjective to view it holistically. Muggers are different. A scientific study would require that the same mugger attack about a thousand women - 500 in the control group, and 500 "trained". All would have to be under the same circumstances. Peoples moods (mugger and victim) actually play a role also. The best we can do is look for trends in the data, and make reasonable assumptions.
I can drop a bag of marbles, and through mathematical algorithms deduce where each one will come to rest. Marbles have no free will. Drop a bunch of ants or any living thing, and all bets are off. The human animal is far more complex. Said BG might hate blondes because his ex was one, so blondes get the "extra" anger treatment. Women have "buttons" also. My family knows not to ask much of me before my second cup of coffee.
Does a 3 hour seminar in finances make me better than my Morgan Stanley guy? Does it help me ask the right questions? Does a two hour seminar in how to break down a lawnmower engine mean I'll never need a new one? 'Dunno, depends on what breaks.
I'm not getting off-topic here. Some are looking (understandably) for "empirical" data. Such data cannot be gathered with such numerous and powerful variables as defending one's life. A cornered mouse will fight. Will it beat the cat? Depends on the cat.The best we can do is be subjective. We can disagree, but it is an exercise in futility to expect that we will convince 100% of our counterparts. Our dissention must be civil, because we are products of our enviromnment. This is a subjective thread.
I can drop a bag of marbles, and through mathematical algorithms deduce where each one will come to rest. Marbles have no free will. Drop a bunch of ants or any living thing, and all bets are off. The human animal is far more complex. Said BG might hate blondes because his ex was one, so blondes get the "extra" anger treatment. Women have "buttons" also. My family knows not to ask much of me before my second cup of coffee.
Does a 3 hour seminar in finances make me better than my Morgan Stanley guy? Does it help me ask the right questions? Does a two hour seminar in how to break down a lawnmower engine mean I'll never need a new one? 'Dunno, depends on what breaks.
I'm not getting off-topic here. Some are looking (understandably) for "empirical" data. Such data cannot be gathered with such numerous and powerful variables as defending one's life. A cornered mouse will fight. Will it beat the cat? Depends on the cat.The best we can do is be subjective. We can disagree, but it is an exercise in futility to expect that we will convince 100% of our counterparts. Our dissention must be civil, because we are products of our enviromnment. This is a subjective thread.
Last edited:
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I don't do lit reviews for folks. I read up for myself. Go to the library. You will find the references very quickly.
The amount of ignorance in this thread about research design is stunning.
It is the presumption of the folks against these courses that they hurt women. I suggest it is really misogyny that leads some men to denigrate women.
The amount of ignorance in this thread about research design is stunning.
It is the presumption of the folks against these courses that they hurt women. I suggest it is really misogyny that leads some men to denigrate women.
Unfortunate. So many subtleties you fail to get.
Why does the word "honor" make you recoil so, JustMe?
Before dismissing the concept of honor as hollow, perhaps you should consider your circumstances and how they color your thinking.
Of course a trained individual is in a better position to defend himself.
Of course it happens that people are held at gunpoint.
Of course occasionally it becomes obvious to those people that they are on the verge of being killed. (Please note Pax' news clip.)
What precisely is your argument at this point?
Mr. Meyer,
You do research design for a living, really? But you can name not one "empirical" study, what you demanded from your opponents, to prove your point. I can smell bluster. You're not the only one here to have research methodology training, or to know who Stanley and Stanley are. The null hypothesis, that this course has no effect, is accepted. The advocate of the contrary hypothesis can produce no support for his theory. Changing the subject by crying "discrimination against women" is out of line...and ridiculous. Send two teenage boys, who say that they didn't want to go, to the same course and I would say exactly the same thing about them.
You do research design for a living, really? But you can name not one "empirical" study, what you demanded from your opponents, to prove your point. I can smell bluster. You're not the only one here to have research methodology training, or to know who Stanley and Stanley are. The null hypothesis, that this course has no effect, is accepted. The advocate of the contrary hypothesis can produce no support for his theory. Changing the subject by crying "discrimination against women" is out of line...and ridiculous. Send two teenage boys, who say that they didn't want to go, to the same course and I would say exactly the same thing about them.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
This ain't my usual bailiwick, but I see this thread is degenerating into a personal squabble--and that tends to be a thread-closing sequence...
Art
Art