Self Defense

It's pretty simple to me. Learn both. I think the rapper Scarface said it best: "I'm pretty good with my hands but I prefer my gat."

Having a weapon is good but it's really all about who gets the jump on whom first. Being quick on the draw like Lucas McCain in the Rifleman. However, you could find yourself in a situation where there are no weapons and someone is looking to kick your ass. Having good fight skills could buy you some time if nothing else. I would advise no matter how skilled you are if you can run from a fight then run. Reminds me of Evander Holyfield stories about always running from kids in high school but when they finally caught up to him he would beat the living shit out of em. Lol

The waring is not a dissertation of your life, it's proceed at your own peril kind of thing.

Sweet baby Tebow, all 8 lbs and 6 ozs of baby beauty. You were taught to warn people of your skill? Ah hell, I have seen at least a dozen "black belts" limping and bloodied when they warned the belligerent. Hell, one was so stupid he got his ass whooped as he tried to take off his cowboy boots. Damn, that used to be good entertainment. Originally Posted by pyramider

Attachment 340314

Guess you got me there. All black belts of any kind are destined to lose every fight they're ever in. Can't argue with proof like this

No I'm suggesting you've spent so much time in the political forum focusing on abstractions ... on this topic (and some others) I don't deal in "abstractions" and I spent a lot of time on this topic before there was a "political forum" ... and I have addressed the severe training deficiency in the licensing process many times before addressing your uninformed comments.

repeated your own opinion which completely avoids the fact that we are comparing one thing to another. I am not comparing hand/feet and weapon defense. I am focusing on a training deficiency in both that gives people who don't know any better a false sense of security and can result in them getting hurt or worse when they might intelligently avoid an unnecessary confrontation when realizing their abilities and training might be inadequate to engage in the confrontation to success. That is A "problem" with these anonymous, testosterone ladden, locker room environment macho threads with NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Some follks on here might actually believe that a CHL class (5 hours shooting at paper targets) is sufficient to prepare them for the OK Corral in their incall room on the sixth floor of the Hotel in customarily low light, swift moving, and close quarter confrontations.


Are you suggesting it takes less time to become proficient at a martial art than a firearm? Are you suggesting that a self defense class leaves a woman more prepared than handgun training? No. See above. Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

Speaking of the "Political Forum" .... A new thread addresses an "issue" raised in all training, most particularly firearm training, regarding "self-defense" or putting it another way .... one's defense of themselves or another.

I won't address the remark about a "period" before "45" ... other than to simply say that is the kind of silly response seen too often in the "political forum" when one has little else to say. Hopefully you are not pretending to discredit my suggestions with the failure to place a period before "45" on a hooker board blog?

When a "graduate" of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice has more "training" in taking a weapon away than a graduate of the DPS-CHL course has in "retaining" the weapon in a close-quarters engagement, then one needs to "rethink" the amount of training qualifying one for the "close-quarters" engagement. And that is just one issue to consider, but a critical one when adding a firearm to the hobby experience.

Speaking of the "Political Forum" .... A new thread addresses an "issue" raised in all training, most particularly firearm training, regarding "self-defense" or putting it another way .... one's defense of themselves or another.

I won't address the remark about a "period" before "45" ... other than to simply say that is the kind of silly response seen too often in the "political forum" when one has little else to say. Hopefully you are not pretending to discredit my suggestions with the failure to place a period before "45" on a hooker board blog?

When a "graduate" of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice has more "training" in taking a weapon away than a graduate of the DPS-CHL course has in "retaining" the weapon in a close-quarters engagement, then one needs to "rethink" the amount of training qualifying one for the "close-quarters" engagement. And that is just one issue to consider, but a critical one when adding a firearm to the hobby experience. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Lexus, I appreciate your comments but it seems on this issue you are using statistical data to make the point that handguns are unsafe. Before the CHL was passed in Texas, opponents used similar tactics to try to scare the public into believing Texas would become "like the wild west." Nothing could be farther from the truth. Even the Police Chief of Dallas, who campaigned vigorously against the CHL law, now admits he was wrong. CHG save lives!

Another aspect of your argument is that a monumental amount of training is necessary to obtain the skills to handle a small firearm. That is also a misnomer. US military have minimal training exercises for soldiers, sailors and airmen. All of these individuals, men and women, carry firearms when performing their duty. Standard issue for the Navy is a 1911 .45 sidearm. I think that's a little heavy for most of these ladies I think a 9mm with a hollow tip round would be more appropriate.

No one wants to shoot anyone, some people just deserve it.

If any ladies here want to join me at my dojo for mma and kickboxing ill soap you up for free after the class , in the shower. Pay for your own lesson.

Are you suggesting it takes less time to become proficient at a martial art than a firearm? Are you suggesting that a self defense class leaves a woman more prepared than handgun training? Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

No. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Thank you for at last stipulating to my point that it takes less time to become proficient with a firearm than a martial art and that self defense classes leave a woman less prepared than weapons training. As I stated before, that was the only point I was making.

The rest of your response is outside the scope of the discussion. Clearly close quarter retention techniques should be a part of tactical firearms training. Obviously it is up for debate how much time it takes to become proficient at either, my use of a number of hours was arbitrary and irrelevant to the larger point.

If any ladies here want to join me at my dojo for mma and kickboxing ill soap you up for free after the class , in the shower. Pay for your own lesson. Originally Posted by Sonya

I'll take you up on that sexy, I get tired of kickboxing at my gym sometimes and could use a change of scenery... Do I have to bring my own soap too...?

Thank you for at last stipulating to my point ... Originally Posted by SpiceItUp

I didn't stipulate to anything. That was not the question to which I said "no."

But continue with your delusions.

I have said what I believe to be correct and generally acceptable concepts.

Rarely do I hear (or see) someone attempting to justify less training on anything, much less things that can cause serious bodily injury. Mind boggling.

But you go ahead.

That's the result of a discussion between guys in a room full of pussy.

Go watch the "Animal" channel by National Geographic.

I didn't stipulate to anything. That was not the question to which I said "no."

But continue with your delusions.

I have said what I believe to be correct and generally acceptable concepts.

Rarely do I hear (or see) someone attempting to justify less training on anything, much less things that can cause serious bodily injury. Mind boggling.

But you go ahead.

That's the result of a discussion between guys in a room full of pussy.

Go watch the "Animal" channel by National Geographic. Originally Posted by LexusLover

So you ARE suggesting that women would be safer taking self defense classes than firearms training? I'm confused, I mean I know over there in the political forum you guys are used to talking out of both sides of your mouths but which is it?

I never attempted to justify any such thing. I merely said that whatever time put toward self defense training would be better spent on firearms training as it would leave one more prepared.

But you go ahead grinding that axe.

Also, last I checked, you're here arguing on a hooker board the same as us. Get off your fucking high horse.

Lexus, I appreciate your comments but it seems on this issue you are using statistical data to make the point that handguns are unsafe. Before the CHL was passed in Texas, opponents used similar tactics to try to scare the public into believing Texas would become "like the wild west." Nothing could be farther from the truth. Even the Police Chief of Dallas, who campaigned vigorously against the CHL law, now admits he was wrong. CHG save lives!

Another aspect of your argument is that a monumental amount of training is necessary to obtain the skills to handle a small firearm. That is also a misnomer. US military have minimal training exercises for soldiers, sailors and airmen. All of these individuals, men and women, carry firearms when performing their duty. Standard issue for the Navy is a 1911 .45 sidearm. I think that's a little heavy for most of these ladies I think a 9mm with a hollow tip round would be more appropriate.

No one wants to shoot anyone, some people just deserve it. Originally Posted by drax1

One has to base "statistics" on the individual qualifications of those discharging their firearm and more importantly the environment in which the incident occurred. I am not opposed to carrying a firearm, whether licensed or not (or owning them). We are not talking about "skills' to handle a "small firearm" and we are not talking about "military" environment.

"a 9mm with a hollow tip round would be more appropriate."

Actually, for most incall settings I have seen ...

.. a flare gun from Academy loaded with light field shotgun shell is better...

... and takes less skill.

Alyssa does have some ass kicking legs. I'd love to see nude ju jitsu between Alyssa and Sonya.

I'll take you up on that sexy, I get tired of kickboxing at my gym sometimes and could use a change of scenery... Do I have to bring my own soap too...? Originally Posted by Alyssa XOXO

Not unless you dislike lavender. ;-)

One has to base "statistics" on the individual qualifications of those discharging their firearm and more importantly the environment in which the incident occurred. I am not opposed to carrying a firearm, whether licensed or not (or owning them). We are not talking about "skills' to handle a "small firearm" and we are not talking about "military" environment.

"a 9mm with a hollow tip round would be more appropriate."

Actually, for most incall settings I have seen ...

.. a flare gun from Academy loaded with light field shotgun shell is better...

... and takes less skill. Originally Posted by LexusLover

A flare gun would likely start a fire and fill the room with blinding smoke as it bounces around until it's propellant depleted. Believe me, I've done it.

A .45 or a .40 is fine for small compartments. They are just physically heavy and have a big kick for a small lady. A .45 slug is less likely to penetrate a wall than a 9mm or .22. That is the reason that I suggested using a hollow point.

DEA agents and military assault forces use 9mm because they will penetrate vehicle doors and thin walls whereas .45 cal. is heavy and more difficult to wield. The character of a handgun can be changed simply by changing the grain and hardness of the round fired. I would feel equally comfortable with a .45 as a 9mm in a close compartment setting. Much of it has to do with comfort.

My personal favorite is a SIG P226 with a soft-point 9mm round.

As Spice said, merely brandishing a firearm is usually enough to stop aggression in it's tracks. I don't care how big and bad you think you are, looking down the barrel of a gun makes you reconsider your position.

i don't know how much of any of this is applicable to providers. They must have better ways to guard against asshole clients. As for me, I avoid all confrontation because I know what will happen if I injure or kill another person. Even if I'm within my legal right to protect myself, I'll be sued relentlessly in civil court and it'll cost me a fortune. Thank goodness we live in Texas.

I'll take you up on that sexy, I get tired of kickboxing at my gym sometimes and could use a change of scenery... Do I have to bring my own soap too...? Originally Posted by Alyssa XOXO

Not unless you dislike lavender. ;-) Originally Posted by Sonya

Yeah okay, Lavender, Apricot, Autumn scent who gives a damn, y'all just need to set that shyte up! And holla at ya boy so I can watch. Just sayin'...

Has anyone here shot a person with wasp & hornet spray? I haven't...but it sounds like it could be fun. The little-bitty mace canisters I've seen aren't at all effective. The bear mace is mighty wishful thinking for bear-defense but it's probably OK for humanoid shitbirds.

Anyways...if you've used wasp&hornet spray on a person, please chime in...No lying, though! Ha, as if.