3 ms·
Im not sure how I give that impression.. I've deliberately tried not too. You gave it by saying things like: If your well trained and you are happy that your
by mos1 17y ago
Im not sure how I give that impression.. I've deliberately tried not too.
You gave it by saying things like:
If your well trained and you are happy that your assailant is unskilled then it makes sense to take action :)
Anyway, I think the biggest difference in our standpoints is that I've been robbed at knifepoint.
In the moment, all I could really think was that I wanted to be around for my wife and kids far more than I gave a shit about anything else, so I decided, in the moment, that I'd engage only if it seemed like a physical attack was inevitable. I tossed the wallet, and avoided the attack.
I was, and still am, happy with the result. And I will continue to disagree with those (such as yourself) who advocate fighting simply when you think you'll win, drawing the line instead at fighting when there are no other viable options.
- ErrantX 17y ago> You gave it by saying things like: I specifically say things like: you are happy Which isn't trying to imply 100% accuracy of prediction. It's saying if your happy that your assessment is that he's unskilled is accurate then do it. If your not, then I guess it depends on the person what you want to do. I see you mentioned elsewhere you were learning boxing and karate when you were mugged. Im not aware that any of those disciplines give you suitable training in disarming a knife wielder. So you made the right choice IMO. Waiting till your forced to fight is, IMO, the worst move. If your able to disarm the guy all your doing is sacrificing a part of your advantage. (if your not able to disarm him then, yeh, clearly co-operation then trying your best if attacked is the best policy).