Important Links

Hock's Blog

Hock's Downloads

CQC-Facebook

Hock's Facebook

Hock's Seminars

Hock's Shopsite

Hock's Web Page


New Products

Combat Kicks VID

Critical Contact VID

Death Grip of Knife VID

Dominant/Counter VID

First Contact VID

Impact Weapons Book

Knife Book

The Other Hand VID


Lauric Enterprises, Inc.
1314 W. McDermott
Ste 106-811
Allen, TX 75013
972-390-1777

 

 

 


W. Hock Hochheim's

           Combat Centric

Talk Forum for Military, Police, Martial Artists and Aware Citizenry



Hock Hochheim's Combat Talk Forum

  • January 17, 2018, 10:15:31 PM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed  (Read 4605 times)

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« on: April 26, 2005, 04:05:06 AM »

(Guys, I did not write this! This comes from Force Science)

EDGED WEAPON DEFENSE: IS THE 21-FOOT RULE STILL VALID? WAS IT EVER?
Part 1 of a 2-Part Series

For more than 20 years now, a concept called the 21-Foot Rule has been a
core component in training officers to defend themselves against edged
weapons.

Originating from research by Salt Lake City trainer Dennis Tueller the "rule" states that in the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.

The implication, therefore, is that when dealing with an edged-weapon
wielder at anything less than 21 feet an officer had better have his gun
out and ready to shoot before the offender starts rushing him or else he
risks being set upon and injured or killed before he can draw his sidearm
and effectively defeat the attack.

Recently a Force Science News member, a deputy sheriff from Texas,
suggested that "it's time for a fresh look" at the underlying principles of
edged-weapon defense, to see if they are "upheld by fresh research." He
observed that "the knife culture is growing, not shrinking," with many
people, including the homeless, "carrying significant blades on the
street." He noted that compared to scientific findings, "anecdotal evidence
is not good enough when an officer is in court defending against a wrongful
death claim because he felt he had to shoot some[body] with a knife at
0-dark:30 a.m."

As a prelude to more extensive studies of edged-weapon-related issues, the
Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato has
responded by reexamining the 21-Foot Rule, arguably the most widely taught
and commonly remembered element of edged-weapon defense.

After testing the Rule against FSRC's landmark findings on action-reaction
times and conferring with selected members of its National and Technical
Advisory Boards, the Center has reached these conclusions, according to
Executive Director Dr. Bill Lewinski:

1. Because of a prevalent misinterpretation, the 21-Foot Rule has been
dangerously corrupted.

2. When properly understood, the 21-Foot Rule is still valid in certain
limited circumstances.

3. For many officers and situations, a 21-foot reactionary gap is not
sufficient.

4. The weapon (pistol) that officers often think they can depend on to defeat knife
attacks can't be relied upon to protect them in many cases.

5. Training in edged-weapon defense should by no means be abandoned.

In this installment of our 2-part series, we'll examine the first two
points. The others will be explained in Part 2.

1. MISINTERPRETATION. "Unfortunately, some officers and apparently some
trainers as well have 'streamlined' the 21-Foot Rule in a way that gravely
distorts its meaning and exposes them to highly undesirable legal
consequences," Lewinski says. Namely, they have come to believe that the
Rule means that a subject brandishing an edged weapon when positioned at
any distance less than 21 feet from an officer can justifiably be shot.

For example, an article on the 21-Foot Rule in a highly respected LE
magazine states in its opening sentence that "a suspect armed with an edged
weapon and within twenty-one feet of a police officer presents a deadly
threat." The "common knowledge" that "deadly force against him is
justified" has long been "accepted in police and court circles," the
article continues.

Statements like that, Lewinski says, "have led officers to believe that no
matter what position they're in, even with their gun on target and their
finger on the trigger, they are in extreme danger at 21 feet. They believe
they don't have a chance of surviving unless they preempt the suspect by
shooting.

"However widespread that contaminated interpretation may be, it is NOT
accurate. A suspect with a knife within 21 feet of an officer is
POTENTIALLY a deadly threat. He does warrant getting your gun out and
ready. But he cannot be considered an actual threat justifying deadly force
until he takes the first overt action in furtherance of intention--like
starting to rush or lunge toward the officer with intent to do harm. Even
then there may be factors besides distance that influence a force decision.

"So long as a subject is stationary or moving around but not advancing or
giving any indication he's about to charge, it clearly is not legally
justified to use lethal force against him. Officers who do shoot in those
circumstances may find themselves subject to disciplinary action, civil
suits or even criminal charges."

Lewinski believes the misconception of the 21-Foot Rule has become so
common that some academies and in-service training programs now are
reluctant to include the Rule as part of their edged-weapon defense
instruction for fear of non-righteous shootings resulting.

"When you talk about the 21-Foot Rule, you have to understand what it
really means when fully articulated correctly in order to judge its value
as a law enforcement concept," Lewinski says. "And it does not mean 'less
than 21 feet automatically equals shoot.'"

2. VALIDITY. In real-world encounters, many variables affect time, which is
the key component of the 21-Foot Rule. What is the training skill and
stress level of the officer? How fast and agile is he? How alert is he to
preliminary cues to aggressive movement? How agile and fast is the suspect?
Is he drunk and stumbling, or a young guy in a ninja outfit ready to rock
and roll? How adept is the officer at drawing his holstered weapon? What
kind of holster does he have? What's the terrain? If it's outdoors, is the
ground bumpy or pocked with holes? Is the suspect running on concrete, or
on grass, or through snow and across ice? Is the officer uphill and the
suspect downhill, or vice versa? If it's indoors, is the officer at the
foot of stairs and the suspect above him, or vice versa? Are there
obstacles between them? And so on.

These factors and others can impact the validity of the 21-Foot Rule
because they affect an attacking suspect's speed in reaching the officer,
and the officer's speed in reacting to the threatening charge.

The 21-Foot Rule was formulated by timing subjects beginning their headlong
run from a dead stop on a flat surface offering good traction and officers
standing stationary on the same plane, sidearm holstered and snapped in.
The FSRC has extensively measured action and reaction times under these
same conditions. Among other things, the Center has documented the time it
takes officers to make 20 different actions that are common in deadly force
encounters. Here are some of the relevant findings that the FSRC applied in
reevaluating the 21-Foot Rule:

--Once he perceives a signal to do so, the AVERAGE officer requires 1.5
seconds to draw from a snapped Level II holster and fire one unsighted
round at center mass. Add 1/4 of a second for firing a second round, and
another 1/10 of a second for obtaining a flash sight picture for the
average officer.

--The fastest officer tested required 1.31 seconds to draw from a Level II
holster and get off his first unsighted round.

--The slowest officer tested required 2.25 seconds.

--For the average officer to draw and fire an unsighted round from a
snapped Level III holster, which is becoming increasingly popular in LE
because of its extra security features, takes 1.7 seconds.

Meanwhile, the AVERAGE suspect with an edged weapon raised in the
traditional "ice-pick" position can go from a dead stop to 21 feet on a
level, unobstructed surface offering good traction in 1.5-1.7 seconds.

The "fastest, most skillful, most powerful" subject FSRC tested "easily"
covered that distance in 1.27 seconds. Intense rage, high agitation and/or
the influence of stimulants may even shorten that time, Lewinski observes.

Even the slowest subject "lumbered" through this distance in just 2.5
seconds.

Bottom line: Within a 21-foot perimeter, most officers dealing with most
edged-weapon suspects are at a decided--perhaps fatal--disadvantage if the
suspect launches a sudden charge intent on harming them. "Certainly it is
not safe to have your gun in your holster at this distance," Lewinski says,
and firing in hopes of stopping an activated attack within this range may
well be justified.

But many unpredictable variables that are inevitable in the field prevent a
precise, all-encompassing truism from being fashioned from controlled
"laboratory" research.

"If you shoot an edged-weapon offender before he is actually on you or at
least within reaching distance, you need to anticipate being challenged on
your decision by people both in and out of law enforcement who do not
understand the sobering facts of action and reaction times," says FSRC
National Advisory Board member Bill Everett, an attorney, use-of-force
trainer and former cop. "Someone is bound to say, 'Hey, this guy was 10
feet away when he dropped and died. Why'd you have to shoot him when he was so far away from you?'"

Be able to articulate why you felt yourself or other innocent party to be
in "imminent or immediate life-threatening jeopardy and why the threat
would have been substantially accentuated if you had delayed," Everett
advises. You need specifically to mention the first articulable motion that
indicated the subject was about to attack and was beyond your ability to
influence verbally."

And remember: No single 'rule' can arbitrarily be used to determine when a
particular level of force is lawful. The 21-Foot Rule has value as a rough
guideline, illustrating the reactionary curve, but it is by no means an
absolute.

"The Supreme Court's landmark use-of-force decision, in Graham v. Connor,
established a 'reasonableness' standard," Everett reminds. "You'll be
judged ultimately according to what a 'reasonable' officer would have done.
All of the facts and circumstances that make up the dynamics between you
and the subject will be evaluated."

Of course, some important facts may be subtle and now widely known or
understood. That's where FSRC's unique findings on lethal-force dynamics
fit in. Explains Lewinski: "The FSRC's research will add to your ability to
articulate and explain the facts and circumstances and how they influenced
your decision to use force."

Force Science Research Center. a non-profit organization based at Minnesota
State University, Mankato.

*******

"I agree. That is why in Level 1 we do the Tueller vs Mozambique vs. Karate scenario with sims ammo. Which is:

1) The Tuller set-up situation

2) The Mozambique drill-two to the head and one to the face (the face shot is hard to do, but makes you think about it...and when he is so close?)

3) Dealing with his charged momentum (Often the forgotten part of reality because the shot man can fall on you "

Hock
« Last Edit: June 07, 2006, 04:08:21 PM by HockHoch@aol.com »
Logged

Professor

  • In your house drinking your coffee
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 1827
  • The Warlord
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2005, 05:48:29 AM »

EDGED WEAPON DEFENSE: IS THE 21-FOOT RULE STILL VALID? WAS IT EVER?


The outcome now is....it depends.    ::)
You have to love the researchers (ooops, that's me).

Seriously, I'm glad that cops and citizens are getting some good informattion to better defend themselves in front of a jury.    I would love to see this study done with multiple options from the cops (for example: step to the side - strong and weak) and bad guys (saber, icepick, drunk, sober, etc.)....there's so much more that they could have done in this research to better help.   This is a good step one....

Logged
  'Advanced' is being able to do the basics, despite what else is happening. 

Our Country won't go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won't be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race!"  --- Chesty Puller, USMC

kayakpirate

  • Level 2
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
  • "There are some who call me... Tim..."
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2005, 09:55:54 PM »

I'm reminded of the police officer in the Philippines.He held his fire against a knife weilding
lunatic Tried to out maneuver the knife guy.Turned into a game of tag. Finally ended up with the lunatic trapping the cops gun arm down and stabbing the poor man to death.
The bad guys can side step also.
Logged

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2005, 06:27:45 AM »

The bad guys can side step also.

Yup.
It is a good idea to step away from the knife side of the hopefully, freshly shot and stunned attacker. This makes him have to cross his body with the stab and makes it only tad harder for him to reach and get you.

Tueller is like an open, parking lot drill. Where else will you find all that space without an obstacle to get behind and use, to change the dynamics of the drill.

(As a side issue, the Taser's range is 21 feet, based on the Tuellar drill)
Hock

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed: Part Two
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2005, 06:46:31 AM »

...and for part two from Force Science...

Now in this final installment of our 2-part series we discuss additional
conclusions regarding edged-weapon defense, namely:

3. For many officers and situations, a 21-foot reactionary gap is not
sufficient.

4. Weapons that officers often think they can depend on to defeat knife
attacks can't be relied upon to protect them in many cases.

5. Training in edged-weapon defense should by no means be abandoned.

Here's what FSRC's executive director and selected members of the Center's
National and Technical Advisory Boards have to say on these topics:

3. MORE DISTANCE. "In reality, the 21-Foot Rule--by itself--may not provide
officers with an adequate margin of protection," says Dr. Bill Lewinski,
FSRC's executive director. "It's easily possible for suspects in some
circumstances to launch a successful fatal attack from a distance greater
than 21 feet."

Among other police instructors, John Delgado, retired training officer for
the Miami-Dade (FL) PD, has extended the 21-Foot Rule to 30 feet.
"Twenty-one feet doesn't really give many officers time to get their gun
out and fire accurately," he says. "Higher-security holsters complicate the
situation, for one thing. Some manufacturers recommend 3,000 pulls to
develop proficiency with a holster. Most cops don't do that, so it takes
them longer to get their gun out than what's ideal. Also shooting
proficiency tends to deteriorate under stress. Their initial rounds may not
even hit."

Beyond that, there's the well-established fact that a suspect often can
keep going from momentum, adrenalin, chemicals and sheer determination,
even after being shot. "Experience informs us that people who are shot with
a handgun do not fall down instantly nor does the energy of a handgun round
stop their forward movement," states Chris Lawrence, team leader of DT
training at the Ontario (Canada) Police College and an FSRC Technical
Advisory Board member. Says Lewinski: "Certain arterial or spinal hits may
drop an attacker instantly. But otherwise a wounded but committed suspect
may have the capacity to continue on to the officer's location and complete
his deadly intentions."

That's one reason why tactical distractions, which we'll discuss in a
moment, should play an important role in defeating an edged-weapon attack,
even when you are able to shoot to defend yourself.

"When working with bare-minimum margins, any delay in an officer
responding to a deadly threat can equate to injury or death," reinforces
attorney and use-of-force trainer Bill Everett, an FSRC National Advisory
Board member. "So the officer must key his or her reaction to the first
overt act indicating that a lethal attack is coming.

"More distance and time give the officer not only more tactical options but
also more opportunity to confirm the attacker's lethal intention before
selecting a deadly force response."

4. MISPLACED CONFIDENCE. Relying on OC or a Taser for defeating a charging
suspect is probably a serious mistake.

With fast, on-rushing movement, "there's a real chance of not hitting the
subject effectively and of not having sufficient time" for the electrical
charge--or for a blast of OC--to take effect.”

Lewinski agrees, adding: "A rapid charge at an officer is a common
characteristic of someone high on chemicals or severely emotionally
disturbed. More research is needed, but it appears that when a Taser isn't
effective it is most often with these types of suspects."

Smug remarks about offenders foolishly "bringing a knife to a gunfight"
betray dangerous thinking about the ultimate force option, too. Some
officers are cockily confident they'll defeat any sharp-edged threat
because they carry a superior weapon: their service sidearm. This belief
may be subtly reinforced by fixating on distances of 21 or 30 feet, as if
this is the typical reaction space you'll have in an edged-weapon encounter.

The truth is that where edged-weapon attacks are concerned, "close-up
confrontations are actually the norm," points out Sgt. Craig Stapp, a
firearms trainer with the Tempe (AZ) P.D. and a member of FSRC's Technical
Advisory Board. "A suspect who knows how to effectively deploy a knife can
be extremely dangerous in these circumstances. Even those who are not
highly trained can be deadly, given the close proximity of the contact, the
injury knives are capable of, and the time it takes officers to process and
react to an assault.

"At close distances, standing still and drawing are usually not the best
tactics to employ and may not even be possible." At a distance of 10 feet,
a subject is less than half a second away from making the first cut on an
officer, Lewinski's research shows. Therefore, rather than relying on a
holstered gun, officers must be trained in hands-on techniques to deflect
or delay the use of the knife, to control it and/or to remove it from the
attacker's grasp, or to buy time to get their gun out. These methods have
to be simple enough to be learned by the average officer.

Two techniques that bear reinforcement are illustrated in the well-known
training video "Surviving Edged Weapons", for which Gary Klugiewicz was a
technical consultant. One is a deflection technique called Sweep and
Disengage. The other is a tactic for controlling the attacker's weapon
hand, called by the acronym G.U.N. (Grab...Undo...Neutralize).

Stapp strongly believes that training in edged-weapon defense should
prepare an officer to deal psychologically with getting cut or stabbed, a
realistic probability with lag time, close encounters and desperate control
attempts. "Officers need to be trained to continue to fight," Stapp says.
"They will not have time to stop and assess how severe the wound is. You
don't want them in the mind-set, 'I've been cut, I'm going to die.' They
must remain focused on stopping the attack, taking out the guy who is the
threat to them."

Checking yourself over for injury after the offender is subdued is
important, too, Klugiewicz says. "Some survivors of edged-weapon attacks
report that they were not aware of being cut or stabbed when the injury
occurred. They thought they had just been punched and didn't realize what
really happened until later."

5. TRAINING. "Assuming it is presented accurately and in context with the
many variables that shape knife encounters, the 21-Foot Rule can be a
valuable training aid," Lewinski says. "As a role-playing exercise, it
provides a dramatic and memorable demonstration of how fast an offender can
close distance, and it can motivate officers to improve their performance
skills."

Experiment with it and you may conclude, like Delgado, that 21 feet is not
enough of a safety margin for your troops.

You might also use 21-Foot Rule exercises to test tactical methods for
imposing lag time on offenders in order to buy more reaction time for
officers. These could range from using or creating obstacles (standing
behind a tree or shoving a chair between you and the offender) to moving
yourself strategically. You're probably familiar with the Tactical L, for
example, in which an officer moves laterally to a charging offender's line
of attack. With the right timing, this surprises and slows the attacker as
he processes the movement and scrambles to redirect his assault, and gives
the officer opportunity to draw and get on target.

Lewinski favors a variation called the Tactical J. Here, instead of moving
90 degrees off line, the officer moves obliquely forward at a 45-degree
angle to the oncoming offender. "This tends to be more confusing to the
suspect and requires more of a radical change on his part to come after
you," Lewinski says. "But the timing has to be such that the suspect is
fully committed to his charge and can't readily adjust to what you've done.
That takes lots of practice with a wide variety of training partners."

If nothing else, training with the 21-Foot Rule will help officers better
estimate just how far 21 feet is. Without a good deal of practice, most
can't accurately gauge that distance, Lewinski says, and thus tend to
sabotage appropriate defensive reactions.

Don't forget, though, that most edged-weapon attacks are "up close and
personal." That means training must include effective empty-hand-control
techniques, close quarters shooting drills and weapon retention. "We need
to develop the ability to draw our sidearm, get on target and GET HITS
extremely fast," while moving as a diversionary measure if possible, says
Stapp. "Close-range shooting--under 10 feet--will most effectively be
accomplished when an officer has developed the ability to get on target 'by
feel,' without using his sights."

Lewinski also recommends drills to imprint rapid reholstering techniques.
Reholstering may become necessary if there's a sudden change in threat
level--say the offender throws his weapon down and is no longer presenting
an imminent threat justifying deadly force--and the officer needs both
hands free to deal with him.

There's little doubt that the "knife culture" and related attacks on
officers are dangerously flourishing. Edged-weapon assaults are a staple of
the news reports of police incidents. Recently an officer in
New York City was slashed in the face during a fight that broke out on a
man-with-a-gun call...in Ohio, a state trooper fatally shot a berserk
motorist who charged him with a hatchet...another offender, who called 911
in Pennsylvania to report he was having a heart attack, ended up shot 13
times and killed after commands and OC failed to stop him from lunging at a
trooper with a chain saw...in Calgary (Ont.) a blood-soaked man waved a
bloody butcher knife over his head and charged at constables who responded
to a domestic...a suspected rapist attacked a Chicago detective with a
screwdriver after luring him into an interrogation room by asking for a
cigarette...in the reception area of a California prison, an inmate serving
time for trying to kill a cop stabbed a correctional officer to death with
a shank...in Idaho, an out-of-control teenager punched holes in the walls
of his house with a 15-inch bayonet, then turned on a responding officer
with the blade and sliced his uniform before the cop shot him....

"Given today's environment, rather than draw back on edged-weapon training,
officers and agencies should be expanding it," Lewinski declares.
"Edged-weapon attacks are serious and should be taken seriously by
trainers, officers and administrators alike. Finding out what works best in
the way of realistic tactical defenses and then training those tactics as
broadly as possible has never been more needed."

FSRC is currently involved in additional research on the dynamics of
edged-weapon confrontations and plans a major report on its findings before
the end of this year.

pmh1nic

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • Brentwood Self-Defense Academy
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2005, 06:56:11 PM »

Question - why would any police officer be within 21 feet, 30 feet or 50 feet of a person with a knife IN HAND and NOT have his firearm ALREADY DRAWN? I'm not talking about a surprise attacker but an officer approaching or being approached by someone with a weapon in hand.

If the answer is "we don't want to excite the assailant with the knife" I say have the firearm in hand with your arm at your side. In my opinion that's all the leyway I give as far as not exciting the assailant. I don't want officers in a race with an attacker where a few tens of a second in a pressure packed situation may mean the death of an police officer.
Logged

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2005, 07:34:37 PM »

Question - why would any police officer be within 21 feet, 30 feet or 50 feet of a person with a knife IN HAND and NOT have his firearm ALREADY DRAWN?

Actually the whole thing started as a test at short range. They started at 5, 8, 10, 12 and so on feet and the average joe could not draw and fire. It so happens that the footage wound up at 21 feet before this could be accomplished. Then they published this fact. It really is supposed to be a wake-up call for officers to realize that they had BETTER get that gun out quicker than they previously thought!

Hock

arnold

  • the king of cool
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
  • oh that will get you killed
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2005, 01:37:42 PM »

As the Nazi SS guys line from "Raiders of the Lost Ark" states " shoot them, shoot them both"
Logged
I leave you idiots alone for 5 minutes and I come back and you're all dancing around like a bunch of Kansas City faggots
you're all a bunch of slack jawed faggots around here, this stuff will make you a sexual tyrannosaurus, just like me!

kayakpirate

  • Level 2
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
  • "There are some who call me... Tim..."
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2005, 09:38:22 AM »

A favored technique that was used quite a bit in the islands where I'm from was to use a reverse grip, the arm concealing the knife blade. Bad guy would walk right up to you and the next thing you know, you have a knife at your throat. Very quick and close in. Was real popular with robbing the tourists.Just some guy saying "hello".Often the weapon was just a very cut down machete.Real scary looking,especially when it comes out of nowhere.
I imagine in a lot of cases when the bad guy with a knife got close in, he was concealing the weapon.Or his intentions. This can definitly create a situation where you have the guy with the knife in your face before you know it.Now you have a knife within a few feet of you.
People are all to often conditioned to think of the attacker announcing his intentions from a distance(comfort zone) away.Giving them time to put together their reaction.Not realistic.
Also probably the reason why so many people get hurt with bladed weapons.If they dont see
a weapon,then one dosent exist.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2005, 09:40:27 AM by kayakpirate »
Logged

Scott

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2005, 08:57:11 AM »

A favored technique that was used quite a bit in the islands where I'm from was to use a reverse grip, the arm concealing the knife blade. Bad guy would walk right up to you and the next thing you know, you have a knife at your throat. Very quick and close in. Was real popular with robbing the tourists.Just some guy saying "hello".Often the weapon was just a very cut down machete.Real scary looking,especially when it comes out of nowhere.
I imagine in a lot of cases when the bad guy with a knife got close in, he was concealing the weapon.Or his intentions. This can definitly create a situation where you have the guy with the knife in your face before you know it.Now you have a knife within a few feet of you.
People are all to often conditioned to think of the attacker announcing his intentions from a distance(comfort zone) away.Giving them time to put together their reaction.Not realistic.
Also probably the reason why so many people get hurt with bladed weapons.If they dont see
a weapon,then one dosent exist.


Canceled grips can also works for the defender.

Year ago, before I got into CQC or even knew you could take a knife into an airport, I went to pick up a fiend at Lovefield in Dallas. He was suppose to come in a 8 PM. His flight didn’t arrive until 9:30 PM. There were no flights in or out between this time period.

Lovefield at that time had a rep for muggings. Along with the bars and newsstands being closed no security personnel was in sight. So I waited. Directly, two early 20 year-old, black guys and their girlfriend came down the terminal’s hallway. These guys were dressed in old warm-ups as if going to a track meet.  They stop about 30 feet away and pretended to be looking as a wall poster. While the one acted as backup the other walked around and came to within 4 feet of me. I was ready to pop his ass if he made an offensive move. Now I’m not a little guy and at that time benched over 300 lbs so I don’t see myself as having been an easy target, regardless.

When this one that came close turned back towards his backup I heard him say “I don’t think he’s worth it.”

Now re-run this scenario with what I’ve learned from Hock and put it before 9-11. At that time it was legal for me to carry a knife into an airport. Had I known that and had I had the training I’ve gotten from Hock, I would’ve had plenty of time to slip my combatfolder out of my pocket and put it into a canceled grip and waited……sometimes I’ve wish I could re-run these scenario for real. Does that make me sick? ::)

Scott
Logged

Professor

  • In your house drinking your coffee
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 1827
  • The Warlord
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2005, 09:08:49 AM »


Now re-run this scenario with what I’ve learned from Hock and put it before 9-11. At that time it was legal for me to carry a knife into an airport. Had I known that and had I had the training I’ve gotten from Hock, I would’ve had plenty of time to slip my combatfolder out of my pocket and put it into a canceled grip and waited……sometimes I’ve wish I could re-run these scenario for real. Does that make me sick? ::)

Scott


Yes.....

Welcome to the party old friend!  Barnhart and I are the host!
Logged
  'Advanced' is being able to do the basics, despite what else is happening. 

Our Country won't go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won't be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race!"  --- Chesty Puller, USMC

Scott

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2005, 09:12:45 AM »


Now re-run this scenario with what I’ve learned from Hock and put it before 9-11. At that time it was legal for me to carry a knife into an airport. Had I known that and had I had the training I’ve gotten from Hock, I would’ve had plenty of time to slip my combatfolder out of my pocket and put it into a canceled grip and waited……sometimes I’ve wish I could re-run these scenario for real. Does that make me sick? ::)

Scott


Yes.....

Welcome to the party old friend!  Barnhart and I are the host!

And dang good fun hosts you two are at that, Prof.

Scott
Logged

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: 21 Foot Rule Reviewed
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2006, 04:10:01 PM »

Bringing this to the top of the heap...

Hock
 

Download