This may seem like an odd, slightly off topic in a survival and disaster preparedness blog, but fighting for ones life, literally/physically, is a fundamental necessity of survival. When it comes down to it, it is possibly the core of survival (securing ones personal safety not only from nature and happenstance, but from others that will do you harm). I am not a violent person and this is a topic that I reluctantly discuss, as I find the mechanics of it distasteful. Nevertheless, I have formally studied the ways of violence throughout my life, in martial arts, as an MP, as a soldier, in executive protection, and security. In this context, I will be discussing fighting as it pertains to self-defence or the defence of others.
Fighting for your life, or defending oneself, is a fundamental right under Natural Law. If another organism threatens death or bodily injury, every organism has a right to fight back with at least an equal amount of force. I don't want to get too political here, but I firmly believe in respect for competent lawful authority, but even agents of the government are not exempt from human law or natural law. The decisions involved in whether to fight or not occur largely involuntarily in the reptilian sub-brain in all of us, the famous "fight or flight" instinct. I would merely add that there exists a third category, the "freeze" or non-reaction which I theorize are people caught somewhere between the fight or flight conflict. I have personally witnessed all of these reactions in people under extreme stress. It's interesting to note that outward demeanor and comportment in the absence of stress or in simulated stress (in training) is absolutely no indicator of how a person will react under real stress. Really, there is no shame in any of these reactions, it's all naturally involuntary.
I only make a slight distinction between fighting and killing (using deadly force) so the words are interchangable in my lexicon. It is just that the only reason to fight (for me) is when no other alternative is available. Once the decision is reached to fight, the next objective is to end the fight as effectively as possible.
Fighting encompasses a vast spectrum of skills, techniques and abilities. Unarmed combat is a whole separate topic that I may eventually write about another day. I will only address unarmed combat here briefly just to say that it is important to remember the 4th (or "forgotten") range, and, that it should be avoided whenever possible/practical. Actual effectiveness in unarmed combat takes professional training and years of practice and conditioning. Although undoubtedly useful (and confidence building), I find that the actual benefit vs. time/effort expenditure to be a poor ratio. All I'm saying is, if your thing is martial arts, more power to you, but as Colonel Colt said (I'm paraphrasing here), any two-bit punk with a Saturday night special pretty much trumps even the best trained black belt. In martial arts, there is traditionally kicking range, punching range, and then there is grappling. The 4th range that I alluded to is "trapping" range (between punching range and grappling). It's a Kung Fu idea developed by the late, great Bruce Lee. Again, though I don't recommend ever getting into an unarmed combat situation, when of if it happens, I recommend utilizing this "trapping" range. One, because it is a seldom exploited range it will give you an advantage over those unfamiliar with it. Two, because it is simple to learn, doesn't require great strength, and pretty much levels the playing field regardless of size or gender.
Now when I recommend avoiding unarmed combat, I really mean in preference for "armed" combat. Use the simplest tool available that will end the fight quickly. Sometimes this is a firearm. Again, that is an entirely different discussion about that class of weapon that tends to be the epitome of our current technology. Again, I plan to cover this topic separately.
There is seldom a reason NOT to arm oneself. Everyday life is surrounded by potential weapons if one uses imagination. Any object that can be held in the hand, is reasonably solid, pointed or sharp, and has mass can be a weapon, coffee mug, stapler, vase, glass bottle, paperweight, metal belt buckle, large seashell, ball point pens, slate coasters, screwdriver, brass picture frame, brick mantle, fireplace poker, floor lamp, electrical cords, d-cell batteries, hardwood floor, folding chair are all common objects that I am looking at now (as I type) that are all potential deadly weapons.
Just behind firearms on the spectrum are other missile weapons. This includes those primitive weapons that one can possibly make in the field by hand, like clubs, throwing sticks, boomerangs, lances, spears, atlatls, slings, slingshots, bows, arrows, crossbows. Not to mention ballistas, catapults, and trebuchets.
One should choose the deadliest hand weapon that one can practically handle. Assuming some nominal physical ability (like the ability to swing ones arm), it's a matter of choosing a tool with the right length, weight, and potential for trauma (whether it's piercing, slashing, blunt or hacking trauma).
Now, it may seem like getting a huge double bladed battleaxe or a giant hand-and-half sword would be a good tactical choice and would just overwhelm anyone if you're strong enough to wield one, but in reality human arms get tired rapidly, and larger heavier weapons are slower and harder to reset between swings. If it's a single one on one melee, it may not matter, but if it is a part of a larger, longer duration pitched battle, then exhaustion becomes a factor for most people. In some ancient battles, men fought from sunrise to sunset sometimes.
For the average person (if you do not possess exceptional strength, exceptional dexterity, or exceptional training or skill with a certain weapon or technique) the ideal hand to hand weapon should be short (12 to 36 inches), weigh about 2 lbs, have a quick reset time between blows, durable enough to last a few engagements, and should have the trauma potential to end the fight with a single strike/attack.
One school of thought/tactic is to use a long weapon or pole arm to keep an opponent beyond the striking range of their shorter weapon. It is a reasonable tactic, however, it requires some skill to be effective, is a bit heavier and fatiguing, and generally occupies both hands. The Greek (or even Zulu) shield/spear combo was essentially using a shorter spear in one hand, however, it was not really using the range advantage of a true polearm.
A couple of short light fast reacting weapons in each hand is my best suggestion for the minimally trained, but physically able. Sticks are sufficient (tree branches) and can be upgraded from there. Thicker or stronger sticks (clubs, nightsticks, batons). Spikes, hard additions, and weights on the stick (mace, flail). Sharp objects attached to the stick (ax, tomahawk). Making the entire stick a sharp object (sword). Introducing a curve to the sharp edge (machete, khukri, bolo knife). Making it stronger (naval cutlass, waki-zashi).
A pair of simple slashing/hacking weapons is effective and has a relatively short learning curve with little training or practice, an important consideration since most of us don't have time to become kendo masters.
So if I had my druthers, if I could pick any weapon from an armoury, my hand to hand combat weapon of choice would be the short Japanese samurai sword, the wakizashi. Very sharp, very durable, lightweight, lethal in multiple modes (slash, stab, pummel). Real samurai swords are very rare, expensive and tend to attract lots of attention when carried around, so close substitutes might be a short machete or khukri. Because of the unlikelihood of having swords or machetes on one's person, my next weapon of choice would be the ever-versatile Special Forces shovel or Spetznaz spade, because it is just an innocent "little" tool and hides in plain sight. It's a club, hand ax, tomahawk, and short thrusting spear all in one, as well as a very practical tool. With minimal practice, it is devastatingly effective.
I'm not an "axe" man myself, but tomahawks are very good melee weapons and would probably be my next (third) choice. Perhaps a good testimonial to their utility is that they are still used by US Army Rangers today. Applying modern thinking to ancient weapons, a tomahawk possesses many of the best characteristics of a close quarters fighting weapon, relatively light weight (around 2 lbs), potentially disabling blunt trauma due to weight, momentum and leverage, potentially deadly penetrative trauma (esp the heel or spike), a bit of range (longer than knives or extended arm), doubles as an effective missile weapon almost instantly, and not to mention a handy tool also. Notable disadvantages, it takes some skill/practice to wield (or throw) effectively, not a good parry weapon, and somewhat slow to reset after a hit (since the blade or spike tends to stick).
I think I will end my list of practical hand to hand weapons with folding batons (ASP type) or the old tonfa/PR-24 type side handle baton. Even a small aluminum t-ball bat or fish billy make good weapons in this class. Make no mistake, a simple durable stick does tremendous blunt trauma which can be just as deadly as a slashing or penetrative attack. Blunt trauma transfers through helmets, padding and armour. A police type baton is a lightweight, durable, well-balanced stick and in the hands of a trained user is a surprisingly effective weapon. I recommend using them in pairs, like Philippine Escrima style, or even Okinawan Tonfa style.
Finally, because they're primarily designed as fighting tools (weapons) I will mention that I carry my trusty old Kabar tanto and/or my Cold Steel Ti-lite stiletto as tertiary back-up weapons. I mention them, but I don't necessarily recommend the use of knives unless one has received training and practiced their use. 90% of what I have personally witnessed is woefully bad (even comic) knife technique, probably learned from watching too much TV. There are three types of knife fighting generally used by professionals in the modern age. Like, unarmed combat it is a subject that deserves detailed description, so I will discuss it under a separate article.
No comments:
Post a Comment