To Kill or To Restraint / Boaz Aviram

It is right to assume that the way you train gives you habits to react automatically when you need to resolve a problem.

Some cultures assume you will get in trouble if you cause more harm to someone that tried to harm you so it is not worthwhile to learn how to cause harm.

Why then we need to backtrack and teach how to kill first and once we gain confidence we teach how to control and restraint instead? Why do our control and restraint methods include the same striking techniques to hard and soft pressure points but in reduced penetration instead of concentrating on restraining techniques using force and leverage alone?

The answer in one word is efficiency. But the meaning this word takes in this context has many depths in this case.  We want to train someone in the easiest way possible to be aware of all the dangers that another Human Being can intentionally or accidentally be capable of harming another human using his body, and handy objects blunt or edged. Just for this reason alone, we need to be accurate as close as possible to reality to convey it to our students and help them perceive it.

To train how not to get killed by another in Hand to Hand Fighting scenarios, we need to figure out what are the worst case scenarios possible to overcome with bare hands and create a close to real life training scenarios that will train our students to control them.

So we need our training partners to have a good knowledge of killing techniques and in fact we need to know them ourselves in order to understand completely how dangerous they are and how careful we should be in our training and in reality.

It is easier to kill or Knock out by a strike or kick with the impact, than it is to execute a restraining technique. Theoretically the efficiency principle says that if we try restraining another person and he is trying to kill us, he would have the advantage of being more efficient.

Is it possible that we could train to be more efficient in restraining techniques than a person trained in striking and killing techniques? When it comes to individual knowledge almost anything is possible, however,  as a general uniformed comparative analysis, it simply does not make any sense!

If we want to preserve the lives of our dear ones, we should cover up any opening in our system. We want uniformity and ease in training as much as possible. The attacker is trying to find the easiest fastest way to surprise and control us.

Think of it as if someone wants to use you alive, he would try to keep you alive for a while. But he can control you by restraining, you, making you faint and then tying your hands, or point a pistol at you, put a knife to your throat and control you by fear.

Most of the times the person that is threatening us is aware of that he is physically more capable to fight than we are. Sometimes people play poker and they pretend they can. Do you want to play poker when the stake is your life?

No comments: