I don’t know anything about Parkour, except what I have seen on YouTube. I have never seen a combat variant, However, I have stated on this thread many times: Are you fit to fight? Are you fit enough to save your own life? Being able to run from trouble goes back to the beginning of man. Hauling ass should be a top skill for any of us.
And when joints don’t allow one to haul ass… it pays to become more mental.
Think about where you are going, at what time, being observant of your surroundings, making more mental note of “if this, then that”, and spending more effort honing performance in a diminishing selection of capabilities.
Of course we talk about those things, along with first aid, resource deprivation plans, and honoring first responders. I don’t see any issue discussing weapons, as this is what the original post stated for this thread.
Agreed.
Risk mitigation is a big topic in avalanche safety, and something I deal with a lot. That mindset of knowing what dangers are acceptable, while making choices to mitigate any unacceptable dangers carries over to “real life” very well. EG. Purposefully picking a less crowded time of day to run errands in possibly unsafe areas, having a plan so you are effecient with your time and have less exposure time to dangers, always observing and analysing and being willing to adjust to a predetermined plan B… Or if you have a bad feeling just going home garauntees you’ll be able to go back out the next day. You can’t mitigate all danger, so you do your best to manage and reduce danger when and where it is feasible. The little things really do add up.
I guess I just don’t imagine that too many people will realistically get out of bad situations by using Parkour-type moves. As people have commented below, it’s mostly about more mundane things like running away or, preferably, avoiding bad situations through situational awareness. For one thing, in bad situations, most of us are going to be experiencing a surge of adrenaline, and our hearts will be pounding; it will be a struggle just to keep a clear head. Staying calm enough to scan the environs and find quick exits will be an accomplishment for most people. Parkour is impressive, but for Joe Average walking to his car in a parking lot at night, or waiting on a platform to catch the subway home in the evening, it probably isn’t realistic.
Thought for the day:
“A killer with the manners of a rabbit - this is the most dangerous kind.”
― Frank Herbert, Dune
Even when the predators have two legs instead of four, the thought process isn’t much different. In his presentation, one of the key factors that Aprill talks about is gait. There’s ample experimental research to support the idea that exactly how you put one foot in front of the other could make you look more or less appealing as a victim of violent crime. Specifically, the Grayson-Stein study conducted in the mid ’80s gives us a thought-provoking start point for understanding this concept. Grayson and Stein videotaped people walking around New York City. The people videotaped spanned all sizes, shapes, colors, and genders — every single one just going about their daily business with no coaching or instruction from the researchers.
The footage was then shown to a sample of 53 prisoners in upstate New York, all of them incarcerated for violent crimes, who were asked to rate each person from “a very easy rip-off” to “too heavy — would avoid.” Most of the convicts made their decisions in seven seconds or less, with three quarters of the inmates rating the same people as “very easy” victims. Even more interesting, many of the cons had trouble articulating why they chose the people they did. The selectees just seemed to “look like good victims” – furthering the earlier parallel to other predators elsewhere in nature. After further analyzing the video, Grayson and Stein were able to distill down some of the key features of those people selected as victims:
– Their stride was either abnormally short or long. They tended to shuffle or drag their feet.
– Their speed was different than the surrounding crowd — typically slower, indicating a lack of purpose. Though an unnaturally quick pace might also indicate nervousness or uncertainty.
– Selected victims seemed to lack smoothness or fluidity in their movement. Jerky motions, swaying or shifting throughout their gait were common among those chosen by convicts.
– Overall demeanor or body set was also key. Those who slumped, looked down as they walked or seemed to avoid eye contact were selected as victims at a disproportionate rate.
We don’t want to oversimplify the problem by telling you to just walk tall with your chin up and everything will be fine. But anybody with military or LE experience has probably heard trite phrases like “look like a hard target” or “keep your head on a swivel” ad nauseum. The material presented by Aprill suggests that the concept is real and effective.
1 Like
Only thought about this - and I may be totally off-base here - is that direct eye contact can become a confrontation, especially in the wrong part of the wrong city. Of course, taking note of where people are looking and what they’re doing is important, but specifically making eye contact is not something I ever went for - I’ve always been much more focused on hands, which tend to tell a much better picture (clenched fists, shaking, holding an object, in pockets in a suspicious manner).
My aversion to purposefully making eye contact may stem from me being from the Bronx, haha, plus room clearing in the Marines was all about identifying what’s in the hands. Those damn targets in the shoothouse with a guy holding a banana in an isosceles stance used to piss me off. No joke, you’d come into a room and there’d be a terrorist target in a super tactical stance pointing something at you, and so you’d failure-to-stop-drill him and then have the instructor dock you points because he was holding a fuckin banana, like anybody’s gonna hold a banana in that manner if they’re not trying to commit suicide. Anyways, random tangent aside, I’m of the opinion that hands tend to be the quickest way to identify a threat, but I’m all ears if eye contact lends a hand to identifying a subject’s mindset.
Those are good points. When I say make eye contact, I mean make it known that you see a person by being visibly observant and above all, keep your face out of your phone.
If someone sketches me out I want them to know that I see them. That’s the gist of what I’m saying.
I’m definitely not advocating staring contests with gangbangers on the subway.
1 Like
Agree, it is always the hands that kill you.
Those targets were so dumb. I hadn’t seen one in a long time, HA, thanks for that memory:))
IMO, the best advice for street awareness.
1 Like
Thought for the day:
"You got a live hard to be hard… You can’t just turn it on one day when you need it.”
Since the corona lock down and travel bans, I have tried to do as much rucking as possible. The majority of rucks are on National Forest land or rural county roads. Through I always carry a handgun for two legged threats, I have found my walking stick to be one of the most useful items you can take with you. Occasionally, (well twice this past two months) I have encountered dogs who took exception to me walking in front of their farms. Most dogs will just run at you with bluff barking, but, I have had to crack two upside the head to make them back off. The stick comes in handy, because, I don’t want to shoot a person’s dog just for defending whatever it perceives as its territory.
I usually have some type of impact weapon available, most of the time I carry an ASP baton, but, due to a recent law suit filed against my agency, I have adopted a small flashlight for anything but a raid. Rucking alone in rural areas is relative low risk, but, occasionally, you will encounter some drunk locals, who love making stupid remarks about someone walking down the road with a stick. Loud, obnoxious assholes are not a shooting situation and I stopped hitting people with my fists a long time ago.
This is where the walking stick becomes a defensive tool. You can apply Kali, Kendo, or many other stick techniques which will transfer well to the walking staff. All you need are some simple, direct strikes to deter an aggressor, but, remember, unless it is a lethal force situation, stay away from head strikes. A solid strike to the shin or knee will put most anyone down.
I am listing a video, if you can get through the first couple of minutes, the instructor goes into some basic strikes.
For the man or woman who has everything:
Tactical Survival Stick Trekking Hiking Camping Walking Staff.
1 Like
Bat Masterson carried a Bull Cane, a walking stick made from a bull’s penis. You can still buy them.
It seems to me that the key is the right kind of eye contact. Look quickly in the eyes and then look straight ahead without moving your head. This can communicate, “I see you, I have no problem with you, and I’m not afraid of you.” It’s not long enough to be construed as confrontational, but just enough to communicate lack of fear. Also, I suspect that for some people, refusal to make any eye contact at all could be perceived as disrespect, as though you’re so far above the person that for you, they don’t exist. Some people will then feel compelled to make sure you know they exist.
Thought for the day:
I was hesitant to write about this because I have a security issue with posting pictures of a child. Over the past couple of days, I have received several messages from people in my field commenting on the bravery of this young boy. Yesterday, it showed up on an Instagram page of an instructor i deeply respect. This young boy already has demonstrated he has the “core” tactical values of being a man. All my respect.
“Bridger is a hero. How brave is this young man? #Repost @xxxxxxxxxxx. Hey, all. Please, share my nephew’s story so that it gets as much exposure as it can. We know that our little hero would love some words of encouragement from his favorite heroes. On July 9th, my six year old nephew Bridger saved his little sister’s life by standing between her and a charging dog. After getting bit several times on the face and head, he grabbed his sister’s hand and ran with her to keep her safe. He later said, “If someone had to die, I thought it should be me.” After receiving 90 stitches (give or take) from a skilled plastic surgeon, he’s finally resting at home. We love our brave boy and want all the other superheroes to know about this latest hero who joined their ranks”
The core “tactical” virtues of life are (from The Way of Men by Jack Donovan):
STRENGTH: Physical prowess and power; ability to dominate an opponent (of the natural or human variety) instead of being dominated, and to stand fast and immovable when pushed.
COURAGE: The spirit /will/discipline to engage and employ one’s strength when inwardly tempted to shrink/run/hide. There are “higher” forms of courage, but at its most fundamental, it represents an outwardly demonstrated indifference to risk, pain, and physical danger.
MASTERY: Skill and adeptness in using the techniques and technology employed in hunting and fighting; a deft understanding of knowledge that saves lives and furthers the interests of your group.
2 Likes
Hats off to you, young sir.
idaho - Had a LEO-specific question for you. Saw on FB (yeah, I know) where a guy was ‘sort of’ defending the cops involved in the Breonna Taylor shooting - no-knock warrant, middle of night, wrong address, homeowner (Taylor’s boyfriend) shot to defend himself, she was slain in the ensuing gunfight.
This man’s stance was that the cops were executing a warrant they had been given in good faith, apparently from someone else within the department, and that that party should have ensured the information contained in the warrant (including the address, apparently) was correct.
I’ve never worked in law enforcement, but it was always my understanding (too many movies maybe?) that officers responsible for executing warrants (drug task force or whatever) were responsible for building their own case, up to and including building the proper intel package necessary to put before a magistrate who would then either sign off on the warrant or not. (I suppose a larger municipality with a dedicated warrant squad would be an exception, same for SWAT supporting narco or something - assuming that is a thing)
Curious to hear your knowledge on this - same for any other LEO’s on here. I know things may differ from one municipality to another, just curious as to generally how that works.
Follow up news on Bridger.
When I worked narcotics, I got burned on this very same situation. An agent from another task force asked if my unit would help them serve a search warrant in my jurisdiction. I was familiar with the task force , had worked with them before , so, trusted them. Big mistake, the address they had was wrong, the address numbers were reversed. We hit the wrong house. Fortunately, no one was injured and we just ended up getting sued and rightly so. never again.
Absolutely, whoever is writing up the probable cause for the warrant must verify all factors. Where the information was received, double checking the source of the information, double checking the location, providing detailed descriptions of the place and the items to be seized. etc.
If you are the supervisor, this is your responsibility to check the validly of the warrant. This where I made my mistake. I trusted the source and did not do my due diligence. lesson learned.
In my former department and current agency, warrants squads serve mainly arrest warrants for people, they rarely , in my experience, serve any search warrants for drugs or evidence. They may be called in as back up personnel on multiple warrants. SWAT is usually called in when the undercover has direct knowledge of weapons on the premises, especially, in gang houses or suspected meth dealers. Where there is meth, there are always weapons. The narcotics supervisor and lead detective are required to meet with the SWAT commander, outline the probable cause, explain in detail the structure to be hit, provide video or photos of the structure and clearly show the address. If a detective came to me with a signed search warrant, my first question was , "Can you put your hand on the door? meaning, have you checked the address or just took someone’s word for it. No matter what the answer, I would have someone else follow up and check the address again before hitting the place.
The Fourth Amendment is one of our most precious rights, it doesn’t vary anywhere.
I don’t know what happened in this case, but, reading between the lines, if appears some balls were dropped.
I don’t think it was the wrong address. I’m not saying the police are not guilty of any wrongdoing but there are some details that aren’t talked about.
I don’t claim to know all the details, and I am sure there are things not being publicly reported for various reasons (I’ve been privy to similar information in the past concerning controversial events). But from what I have been able to read on the incident - police were there because they claimed someone other than Breonna or Mr. Walker were receiving drug packages at the residence. But the ‘person of interest’ lived ten miles away, and was already in custody before they served the warrant. The warrant apparently claimed the postal inspector gave them or corroborated this information, but the postal inspector in question has publicly stated he said the opposite to the police - that no one other than the residents were receiving packages at that address.
Sounds pretty shady to me, especially considering neither Breonna or Walker had much of a criminal record (her not at all, and I believe he had a short one from several years ago). ‘The world may never know’
Thought for the day:
Difficulties are things that show a person what they are. – Epictetus
For those who have chosen a .12 gauge for home defense, there is a new defensive load on the market you may be interested in:
NOKA, Minnesota – July 13, 2020 – New Personal Defense ammunition from Federal turns shotguns into the ultimate defensive platform. Force X2 copper-plated 00 FX2 buckshot pellets are specially engineered to split into two equal-size pieces on impact. Shipments of this new product have begun to arrive at dealers.
Force X2 utilizes nine splitting pellets to create up to 18 wound channels which improves the transfer of energy from the payload to the target and minimizes the potential for over-penetration reducing the risk to bystanders. Force X2 is also loaded for more manageable recoil, allowing the shooter to stay on target for faster follow-up shots and better accuracy in a self-defense situation.
“Federal’s splitting buckshot is the first significant change to buckshot ammo in over a century. The expert ammunition engineers at Federal decided it was time for improvements in buckshot that would help in some Personal Defense situations,” said Federal Ammunition Shotshell Product Manager Dan Compton. “This new self-defense shotgun load is designed for tremendous energy transfer for a wider and larger amount of terminal damage.”
Testing by Federal engineers conducted at the Federal Ammunition factory in Anoka, Minnesota showed patterns of 4 ½ inches at 7 yards and 14 inches at 20 yards using an improved cylinder choke. Patterns of 4 ¼ inches at 7 yards and 12 inches at 20 yards were achieved with a modified choke. Tests using 10-percent ballistic gel were also conducted by Federal engineers. The range of penetration depth of the segmented pellets in ballistic gel is 5 ¼ to 14 ½ inches with an average of 9 ½ inches. The average depth when pellets start segmenting is 4.5 inches after impact.
Features:
• 12-gauge 2 ¾-inch nine-pellet segmenting buckshot
• Nine FX2 copper-plated buckshot pellets designed to split in half on impact
• Manageable recoil
• The pattern and power of buckshot
• Double the wound channels
• Less collateral damage risk from over-penetration
For those thinking about buying a shotgun for home defense, here is some recent information:
Anyone comment on shooting a bullpup or a magazine fed shotgun?
No experience with either here.
I’ve shot a mini-14 a few times. Didn’t like it. It just seemed odd, no joy. 
Like it was left handed or something.