Awareness and Threat Management

Tim's Discussion Board: Concepts : Awareness and Threat Management
   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 01:54 am: Edit Post

I decided to start this as another thread, and I plan on doing it with the different sub-sections I mentioned in the previous post on martial arts and real fighting, if people are interested enough.

Awareness and Threat Management Strategies:

This goes without saying. The more aware you are in daily life, the better. Getting aware in this day and age of distractions is another matter entirely.

Baseline awareness involves not just looking around you, but actually paying attention. Along with that comes knowing what you are looking at, and trusting your instincts - a feel for what is happening when you look at people and "read" them.

Some things to beware of: getting so wrapped up in our driving, our cell phone conversation, or our I pod that we zone the world around us out. I am continually shocked at how many females I see jogging or walking in quiet areas or even on woodland trails wearing an I Pod. Or folks walking down a city street oblivious to the world around them.

This screams "victim." It screams to any criminal or group of criminals that intends to make a quick buck that you are an easy target, because they will have that extra few seconds to get the drop on you before you mentally adjust to what is going on.


Make a habit of watching what is going on around you. Don't "mean mug" people, but certainly let them know that you are aware of your surroundings versus simply "grazing" down the street like the good little grass eating prey animal criminals seek out. Rehearse a non-threatening comeback to the "What the you lookin' at?" comment you may get when you do make eye contact with some individuals "Sorry, I just lost my job and I am pretty dazed right now, didn't mean anything by it." Someone who thought you were disrespecting him will hopefully move on, the folks that don't are now confirmed threats.

You should also practice what you will say when someone is aggressively approaching you or threatening you - don't engage in a lengthy statement or start responding to aggressive questions: just please step back, step back, step back NOW! and so on. This frees your mind to start developing physical strategies if things go south from there.

Trust your intuition more than your manners.

Manners are actually very important to managing threats - as is a thick skin. You also can't very well go off on any bum that gets a little too close to you to ask for money. You have to learn how to read when someone is a confirmed threat and when someone is potential, but you are not yet on red alert. This takes some practice, and is easier for people with street smarts based on their life experience or jobs. In general, always trust if it "just feels wrong" and don't rationalize that feeling away for the sake of politeness or sympathy. A great resource for this is Gavin DeBecker's book "The Gift of Fear," which should be required reading for anyone interested in self defense - it starts WAY before the physical skills. If you learn the awareness and management portion of self defense, you will almost never have to use your physical skills.

Which brings me to the last point of this post: REFRAME your view of what a confrontation is really like. As martial artists (I did myself for many years) we have a tendency to view things through the lens of our martial arts practice. This includes a confrontation. For many of us, this means dealing with the drunken challenge - be it a transient demanding money, a friend who had a bit too much, or the guy in the bar or at the party (or in the stands at the local MMA fight!) who doesn't like the cut of our jib.

We picture an exchange of words while we subtley shift our weight and take a stance that is not a stance, preparing for the onslaught. In our mind's eye we read his body language and watch his shoulder for the tell tale sign of the sucker punch, and then explode into action with some incredible move that puts him down.

Okay, it could happen. But most of these kinds of things you can and should avoid.

Picture instead a guy asking you if you have any spare change. As you start to say "no I..." all of a sudden from the other side a gun or a knife is pressed up under your chin, a man who is so close that his lips are literally brushing yours tells you not to move or he will blow your head off or cut your throat, and the man who just asked for change is behind you and goes through your pants and grabs your wallet. All in under three seconds.

That is the serious kind of encounter you may have. Doing NOTHING is probably the right thing in this circumstance, but if "I'm gonna cut you" starts turning into an actual cut, you have to start your "self defense" from there. Most martial arts don't deal with this at all, or if they do, do so in a staged and theoretical manner that is not very realistic.

This topic is so vast, can get so subtle, and is given so little realistic treatment in martial arts and self defense instruction that I can only offer this as a taste in the hopes that people will seek out more.


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 02:08 am: Edit Post

I did want to touch on criminal mindset. This is different from an ego-based altercation, such as the drunk in the bar discussed above, or the domestic violence type situation, in which different dynamics are at play.

The people who want your money are just trying to get paid. They are not in it to prove who is a better, badder fighter. The more they have to fight you to higher their risk of getting caught. They don't want to get caught. So, they are not approaching it in an "I can take him" way that the guy who gets lippy with you for cutting in line at the Mickey D's can be.

The guy who wants to get paid cares about speed, surprise and violence of action. Funny, the exact same tactics a SWAT team uses. MINIMIZING resistance is key, and occurs long before physical contact is made. The best way to do so is with the target that appears weak and is unaware. Half of their work is done. The next best way is to distract the target. Teams are best for this, but with one target a rap can start, he draws you in to some story - carefully reading your reactions so the "right" story is being unfurled, and when personal defense is the last thing on your mind POW the physical threat emerges. Often their will be no "fight" at all, but the threat of overwhelming violence and pain is present in the form of a weapon, or simply physical threat if the target is smaller and weaker, as well as the surprise which causes confusion and a lack of ability to process the event as it is occurring result in a total lack of resistance or even cooperation with the attacker. This processing is called the OODA Loop in the tactical training community.

Watch kidnappers who snatch women or older kids on some of the videos that have been caught of these sad events - they move very quickly - they shock and surprise the victim, the threat of force is overwhelming even if no force is used, and the victim starts to comply simply because their very ability to resist is overwhelmed with the momentum of the event. By the time they start to process what is going on, they are in the back of the van being tied up by the accomplice or shoved down in the back seat while being driven away.

Awareness of what is going on around you may key you into this kind of thing before it starts to coalesce, prevent you from being as surprised or overwhelmed, and buy you precious time to orient yourself to events and act decisively.


   By Tim on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 01:23 pm: Edit Post

Excellent information.

I think more martial artists should look into Col. Boyd's work and the OODA Loop.


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 02:09 pm: Edit Post

Absolutely, Tim. I think it is foundational to martial art - Boyd was a modern Sun Zi, and his teachings are resonant of the latter as well.

Here is a collection of links for more in depth reading, including Boyd's Complete Discourse:

http://www.d-n-i.net/second_level/boyd_military.htm#discourse


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 02:17 pm: Edit Post

More Boyd background, including a schematic of the Decision Cycle (another name for the OODA Loop):

http://www.belisarius.com/boyd.htm

Theory of Manuever Conflict (in other words, the principles of jujutsu, or internal MA principles for modern war):

http://www.belisarius.com/theory_of_mc.htm

You'll find dozens of interesting links on those pages. This should hold anyone interested in Boyd's ideas for a while. For an interesting take in book form, any of the bios of Boyd are good and go into his thinking, but the Marine Corps manual "Warfighting" is like reading one of the Chinese military classics, only for the modern day, and has tons of lessons for personal combat as well as manuever warfare. It is heavily based in Boyd's theories.


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 02:30 pm: Edit Post

Well, well, look at this find. An on topic article from Masaad Ayoob I just got from a self defense/cobmatives site I frequent. This is "Pre-Assault Indicators 101."

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob87.html

Other indicators that an assault is imminent, often in conjunction with the weight/stance shift and look away that the article describes:


Grooming Behavior:

A big stress "bleed over." Unconscious running of the hand through the hair, rubbing the back of the neck, the chin, etc. Often in conjunction with a look away just after a target glance. This is a big assault cue.

Also:

Conscious or unconscious weapon checks, of a concealed weapon say in the waistband. More on this later...


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 02:40 pm: Edit Post

Okay, this last and I think I have thrown too much at everyone.

The FBI just released the results of a five year study called "Violent Encounters." My copy is on order, but quoting from some informational posts on that self defense site here.

Remember, these are the same offenders who victimize you and yours:

" New findings on how offenders train with, carry and deploy the weapons they use to attack police officers have emerged in a just-published, 5-year study by the FBI.

Among other things, the data reveal that most would-be cop killers:
--show signs of being armed that officers miss;
--have more experience using deadly force in “street combat” than their intended victims;
--practice with firearms more often and shoot more accurately;
--have no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger. “If you hesitate,” one told the study’s researchers, “you’re dead. You have the instinct or you don’t. If you don’t, you’re in trouble on the street….”

These and other weapons-related findings comprise one chapter in a 180-page research summary called “Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation’s Law Enforcement Officers.” The study is the third in a series of long investigations into fatal and nonfatal attacks on POs by the FBI team of Dr. Anthony Pinizzotto, clinical forensic psychologist, and Ed Davis, criminal investigative instructor, both with the Bureau’s Behavioral Science Unit, and Charles Miller III, coordinator of the LEOs Killed and Assaulted program.


"Violent Encounters” also reports in detail on the personal characteristics of attacked officers and their assaulters, the role of perception in life-threatening confrontations, the myths of memory that can hamper OIS investigations, the suicide-by-cop phenomenon, current training issues, and other matters relevant to officer survival. (Force Science News and our strategic partner PoliceOne.com will be reporting on more findings from this landmark study in future transmissions.)

Commenting on the broad-based study, Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, called it “very challenging and insightful--important work that only a handful of gifted and experienced researchers could accomplish.”

From a pool of more than 800 incidents, the researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers-drug traffickers) and 50 officers, for in-depth exploration. They visited crime scenes and extensively interviewed surviving officers and attackers alike, most of the latter in prison.

Here are highlights of what they learned about weapon selection, familiarity, transport and use by criminals attempting to murder cops, a small portion of the overall research:

Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally, usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available “was the overriding factor in weapon choice,” the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun “because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being.”
Researcher Davis, in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”

Familiarity

Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing “most of the time.” Gang members especially started young.
Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% “regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year,” the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and “street corners in known drug-trafficking areas.”
One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers “go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything.”
In reality, victim officers in the study averaged just 14 hours of sidearm training and 2.5 qualifications per year. Only 6 of the 50 officers reported practicing regularly with handguns apart from what their department required, and that was mostly in competitive shooting. Overall, the offenders practiced more often than the officers they assaulted, and this “may have helped increase [their] marksmanship skills,” the study says.
The offender quoted above about his practice motivation, for example, fired 12 rounds at an officer, striking him 3 times. The officer fired 7 rounds, all misses.
More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these “street combat veterans,” all from “inner-city, drug-trafficking environments,” had taken part in 5 or more “criminal firefight experiences” in their lifetime.
One reported that he was 14 when he was first shot on the street, “about 18 before a cop shot me.” Another said getting shot was a pivotal experience “because I made up my mind no one was gonna shoot me again.”

Again in contrast, only 8 of the 50 LEO victims had participated in a prior shooting; 1 had been involved in 2 previously, another in 3. Seven of the 8 had killed offenders.

Concealment

The offenders said they most often hid guns on their person in the front waistband, with the groin area and the small of the back nearly tied for second place. Some occasionally gave their weapons to another person to carry, “most often a female companion.” None regularly used a holster, and about 40% at least sometimes carried a backup weapon.

In motor vehicles, they most often kept their firearm readily available on their person, or, less often, under the seat. In residences, most stashed their weapon under a pillow, on a nightstand, under the mattress--somewhere within immediate reach while in bed.
Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work. Interestingly, the offenders in this study more commonly admitted having guns under all these circumstances than did offenders interviewed in the researchers’ earlier 2 surveys, conducted in the 1980s and ’90s.
According to Davis, “Male offenders said time and time again that female officers tend to search them more thoroughly than male officers. In prison, most of the offenders were more afraid to carry contraband or weapons when a female CO was on duty.”
On the street, however, both male and female officers too often regard female subjects “as less of a threat, assuming that they not going to have a gun,” Davis said. In truth, the researchers concluded that more female offenders are armed today than 20 years ago--“not just female gang associates, but female offenders generally.”

Shooting Style

Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, “claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights,” the study says.

“They practice getting the gun out and using it,” Davis explained. “They shoot for effect.” Or as one of the offenders put it: “[W]e’re not working with no marksmanship….We just putting it in your direction, you know….It don’t matter…as long as it’s gonna hit you…if it’s up at your head or your chest, down at your legs, whatever….Once I squeeze and you fall, then…if I want to execute you, then I could go from there.”

Hit Rate

More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)
Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, “10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers.”

Missed Cues

Officers would less likely be caught off guard by attackers if they were more observant of indicators of concealed weapons, the study concludes. These particularly include manners of dress, ways of moving and unconscious gestures often related to carrying.

“Officers should look for unnatural protrusions or bulges in the waist, back and crotch areas,” the study says, and watch for “shirts that appear rippled or wavy on one side of the body while the fabric on the other side appears smooth.” In warm weather, multilayered clothing inappropriate to the temperature may be a giveaway. On cold or rainy days, a subject’s jacket hood may not be covering his head because it is being used to conceal a handgun.

Because they eschew holsters, offenders reported frequently touching a concealed gun with hands or arms “to assure themselves that it is still hidden, secure and accessible” and hasn’t shifted. Such gestures are especially noticeable “whenever individuals change body positions, such as standing, sitting or exiting a vehicle.” If they run, they may need to keep a constant grip on a hidden gun to control it.
Just as cops generally blade their body to make their sidearm less accessible, armed criminals “do the same in encounters with LEOs to ensure concealment and easy access.”

An irony, Davis noted, is that officers who are assigned to look for concealed weapons, while working off-duty security at night clubs for instance, are often highly proficient at detecting them. “But then when they go back to the street without that specific assignment, they seem to ‘turn off’ that skill,” and thus are startled--sometimes fatally--when a suspect suddenly produces a weapon and attacks.

Mind-set

Thirty-six of the 50 officers in the study had “experienced hazardous situations where they had the legal authority” to use deadly force “but chose not to shoot.” They averaged 4 such prior incidents before the encounters that the researchers investigated. “It appeared clear that none of these officers were willing to use deadly force against an offender if other options were available,” the researchers concluded.
The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team “did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don’t hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant.”

“Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms,” the report states. “In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.
_________________


   By chris hein on Thursday, February 08, 2007 - 02:08 am: Edit Post

That was a great link Kit, I've been looking for all that stuff for awhile, ever since I heard Meynard talking about it anyways.


   By Kit Leblanc on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:27 am: Edit Post

I got some good comments re: this post during Tim's Seattle seminar, so let's keep it going.

People should be realizing quickly that training in the vast majority of martial arts schools is not street directed at all. This is not to say that you won't gain useful things, but most arts train for the sake of the art/tradition, and even if it is a supposedly combative art, are not trained with the street in mind. They are either geared toward a traditional battle or dueling model, or a stand up challenge street fight. Not the standard criminal assault.

Here is another link, this to a bunch of articles from Darren Laur, a Vancouver B.C. police sgt and reality based self defense trainer. Some good stuff here:

http://www.personalprotectionsystems.ca/safetyarticles.htm


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password: