Comments on: How a Woman Can Beat a Man! Eyes, Ears, and Throat Strikes!

By: John W. Zimmer

John W. Zimmer — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:40:18 +0000

Hi McBain,
.
Agreed that eye shots should not be lightly used. This post was directed at women’s self-defense.
.
Many states including California have laws governing the use of force, for instance here there is a reasonable man standard. If a reasonable man would have done the same thing – a jury would acquit.
.
There are also specific laws against mayhem.
.
Now I agree with your statement about eye strikes being unwarranted in a mutual combat situation or in a situation where there were easier ways to defend one’s life.
.
I am a peaceful man and would only fight to protect my life or someone else’s life for the most part so if someone attacked me after I tried to avoid the confrontation (if I had time) – I would have to assume they were trying to kill me.
.
Now some people think fighting is a game like it is in high-school… you know meeting after school in a vacant lot and duking it out in front of the student body. That goes away after people grow up for the most part. The way most people end up in a fight other than mutual agreed combat in a drunken state at bars (what I am not talking about), is robbery, muggings, rapes, and meaningless street crimes (many with guns). This is what I consider to be a self-defense situation – where you are fighting for your survival.
.
So if you find yourself in a fight for your life – there are few rules (mostly laws and ethics). If you are able to best the attacker with little force – that is great! But if there are weapons, more than one attacker or a big guy that you cannot take a chance with your life – all strikes are open.
.
There is no shame in defending your own life – no matter what you have to do. In this day and age you will be judged by your actions so you cannot take this responsibility lightly (lest you become a criminal yourself).
.
Having said all of this – I would gouge the eyes as a last resort – I would be far more likely to break some knees (side kick) for smash a cheek bone with my punch or elbow.
.
As far as planning alternate strikes – I hit whatever the attacker is open for assuming I am fighting for my life.
.
So I think we are in agreement that lethal force should not be used unless the situation warrants it – I just wanted to define a couple of scenarios that I would use all weapons at my disposal and so long as I stopped when the attacker was no longer a threat – I should not have too many legal problems.

Regards

By: McBain

McBain — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:49:12 +0000

Eyes strikes are lethal force and shouldn’t be used unless the the threat level warrants lethal force. The justification for eye/ear strikes for a woman is a given but not for a man. I am a large capable man would refrain from using eye strikes even in my justified self defense as it would still be seen as cowardly, malicious and an unnecessary brutality, and it may well be. Training for the nose strike is just as effective as the eye strike but without the legal and ethical problems a man may encounter.

By: John W. Zimmer

John W. Zimmer — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:50:02 +0000

Pat and Matt – I agree. Both approaches can work at the right time and place. As a self-defense site – I try to evaluate the pros and cons of many approaches to self-defense.
.
I personally like most approaches to self-defense including, martial arts, non-lethal weapons, lethal weapons, dogs, alarms, body-guards, avoidance, and awareness! I could make a case for many approaches in many situations.
.
I understand that non-lethal weapons are ideal for people that have little fighting experience but one should not bet the farm on that approach (meaning what you do if the mace misses and the attacker gets it away from you?). Alternatively why not carry a key-chain pepper spray on the ready when a lady is walking to her car late at night? As you can see even if the lady is an expert black-belt, one more tool in her arsenal would not hurt.
.
I believe that a layered approach (much like the security on your computer) is wise. In my home I have large dogs, baseball bats, pepper spray, a security screen on the front door and me! A burglar might get by one of the defenses but it he wakes me up – he better be loaded for bear!
.
Great points and plenty of food for thought Pat and Matt

By: Matt Klein

Matt Klein — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:20:12 +0000

The problem with weapons of all types Pat is that they’re not always with us. You cannot take them everywhere. A set of keys, a pen or pencil, a handful of dirt, a rolled up newspaper, there are weapons all around us. The key is having the willingness to use them. Making contact is not such a bad thing if it means you can escape. I have read so many stories of attempted abductions that were unsuccessful due to a swift kick in the jewels, or poke in the eye. Martial arts training develops the confidence and assertiveness to attack if necessary.

By: Pat Morton

Pat Morton — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:46:32 +0000

Martial arts trainging is great. I believe everyone should get some self defense training. The problem is that you have to make contact with someone trying to do you harm. I believe everyone should arm themself with some type of non-lethal weapon such as, a Taser, Pepper Spray, or Stun Gun. The Taser is of course the best choice but it is a little expensive. Pepper Spray gel by Mace, is a excellent choice, it shoots 18′ and sticks like glue. The last choice is a stun gun. The reason I say the Stun Gun is the last choice is because you again have to make contact.