Tactical flashlights giving false sense of security?

[Lightraven]

Training to defend yourself should include fighting through injuries.

That shouldn't be exaggerated to claim that you will be injured, no matter what. That is manifestly untrue. My coworker had no more than a red mark from being slashed on the face with a knife. Luckily, the steak knife was dull.

Then again, I have coworkers who were stabbed, and one who died of those wounds.

Training for knife confrontations is hopelessly inept. That's because you'll have some elderly (or young) woman of a certain appearance with mental problems waving a knife from over there. Citizens will avoid her, but call police. She will get shot by police and die, causing massive rioting through a major U.S. city. The police chief, "a cop's chief" will write in his autobiography that the shooting was wrong, the cops knew it was wrong, and they should've been fired. He'll also write that it is the cops' job to wrestle knives from suspects and hope they aren't stabbed or killed.

Years later, another officer in a much quieter city starts to examine how much ground a suspect with a knife can cover before a gun is drawn and fired twice. It is demonstrated by Dan Inosanto in one of the best selling police training videos.

But Dan Inosanto is Dan Inosanto--not an elderly woman of a certain appearance with mental problems. And suspects don't always close the 21 feet, the cops do. This leads to liability as a function of "improper tactics"--at least for the agency noted.

Shoot a knifer? Seems so obviously justified and yet . . .

I didn't know about those particular riots when I faced off with the particular young woman of the particular appearance with a carving knife, surrounded by young children. But I'm not without a clue. I gave her the chance and she took it.

Maybe drifting off topic, but where knives and offensive use of them is concerned, there isn't much good information, let alone wisdom. Too many fools and Quixotes discussing the issue (nobody on this thread, unless you think the description fits).

 

[unique]

That's just the way it is, here in New York City. I'm currently working at my 3rd security company. And all three made it clear that you don't even touch someone. Instant lawsuit.

Thats insane! Here, the security will use full force if they have to, to eject someone if they trespass. We also have strict laws for people in bars/clubs not leaving the premises when asked to. I always see security here being heavy handed to people if they do not want to comply.

Anyway. I will never rely on any weapon. Knife or light. Huge false sense of security..
I've taught myself to never shower eye contact, never initiate that I've even seen the person. I always acted like they're not even they're. But then again, if something like that were to happen and escalate, I'll either call police straight away or try my best to run :laughing:
In Australia, there are strict laws for people carrying weapons on their person. So a lot of the time. Its safe to say the person wanting to start trouble is unarmed.

 

[Monocrom]

.... BUT, NO ONE will convince me that MOST people (a very few excepted) are prepared to knife fight.

I'm not going to try to convince you of that. Most folks won't even consider a knife as a self-defense tool. As for muggers and thugs, they don't want to knife fight either. You ever see two guys with their knives out, ready to cut each other up.... Just means that one of them screwed up his attack, and the other guy had a knife that he pulled out.

 

[Monocrom]

Thats insane! Here, the security will use full force if they have to, to eject someone if they trespass. We also have strict laws for people in bars/clubs not leaving the premises when asked to. I always see security here being heavy handed to people if they do not want to comply.

To be fair, I never said the security industry in NYC was rational. The industry here, is actually a joke. Doormen and janitors in NYC are unionized. Security guards are not. Doesn't even matter if you're assigned to a client site that the city considers to be a high risk for terrorism. Basically, it's a paycheck. And you get paid to be a human scarecrow with eyeballs.

In Australia, there are strict laws for people carrying weapons on their person. So a lot of the time. Its safe to say the person wanting to start trouble is unarmed.

Every nation has strict laws against certain types of activities. But violent criminals don't care about those laws. I highly doubt that they'd care about strict laws against carrying weapons.

 

[SureAddicted]

But violent criminals don't care about those laws. I highly doubt that they'd care about strict laws against carrying weapons.

Your on the money. Crims will always carry some sort of weapon, it's a sad fact of nature.
Now let's get back to flashlights. :candle:

 

[M@elstrom]

To be fair, I never said the security industry in NYC was rational. The industry here, is actually a joke. Doormen and janitors in NYC are unionized. Security guards are not. Doesn't even matter if you're assigned to a client site that the city considers to be a high risk for terrorism. Basically, it's a paycheck. And you get paid to be a human scarecrow with eyeballs.




Every nation has strict laws against certain types of activities. But violent criminals don't care about those laws. I highly doubt that they'd care about strict laws against carrying weapons.

The only ones effected by "no carry" laws are those who actually abide by the law to begin with, I mean we've had major gun laws changes here (under previous Government) and it didn't stop that Hells Angel affiliate from shooting bystanders (in Melbourne) who came to the aid of the women he was accosting! :scowl:

Now let's get back to flashlights.

+1

Yeah what he said!

 

[nohcho]

Most People dont realize but regular security guards have same powers as private citizens do. Except specialized security like nuclear power plant etc. Security guards are there to moostly detect deter and report, if something serious happens we must call cops, however there are very few exception when you can use force. Security companys are pretty clear about that when they hire people. I work at Microsoft security by the way.

 

[Justin Case]

Years later, another officer in a much quieter city starts to examine how much ground a suspect with a knife can cover before a gun is drawn and fired twice. It is demonstrated by Dan Inosanto in one of the best selling police training videos.

But Dan Inosanto is Dan Inosanto--not an elderly woman of a certain appearance with mental problems. And suspects don't always close the 21 feet, the cops do. This leads to liability as a function of "improper tactics"--at least for the agency noted.

Shoot a knifer? Seems so obviously justified and yet . . .

The video you refer to is "Surviving Edged Weapons".

I've observed people with limps and other injuries cover 7 yds in under 2 sec. I've observed regular people cover it in 1.2 sec.

The problem with "shooting the knifer" is that you have a very weak weapon -- a handgun. And it is very doubtful that you will get an instant stop. Against a determined opponent (and you should assume that all of your opponents are determined), whatever the knifer was doing before he was shot is what he will be doing after he gets shot. That means he will keep running at you until bleedout occurs (which can take ~10 sec or more).

 

[KD5XB]

I've always thought a 200-yard limit was reasonable...

 

[Justin Case]

I've always thought a 200-yard limit was reasonable...

I assume you are kidding, but to clarify for others, at 200 yds, you will be very hard-pressed to justify the use of deadly force against a person who has a contact distance weapon. And there's the dilemma. At 7 yds, the knifer is too close. But at some point, he is too far. But it's not like you have a tape measure out there and have the chance to calmly measure the distance.

 

[KD5XB]

Well yeah, but only half kidding -- 200 yards seems mighty comfortable to me, and I do everything I can to keep that distance! Like driving in the other direction very fast...

 

[lightcacher]

It sounds like a good dose of pepper spray in the face and eyes is one way to slow down an attacker. At least you've given him one extra problem to deal with while he's trying to get to you.

 

[Justin Case]

I've been sprayed with OC in training. Against a determined individual, OC is useless. Against someone running at you, by the time they hit the spray, which generally has limited range, they've already blown right through it and are on you. I stood still, took one direct OC shot in each open eye, and a third shot square in the face. Then I defended against a FIST-suited attacker.

At least with a gun, you have a chance at getting a CNS hit and ending the conflict. OC should be deployed well before it gets to the deadly force stage and when the opponent is already powered up and in attack mode.

 

[Kid9P]

To be fair, I never said the security industry in NYC was rational. The industry here, is actually a joke. Doormen and janitors in NYC are unionized. Security guards are not. Doesn't even matter if you're assigned to a client site that the city considers to be a high risk for terrorism. Basically, it's a paycheck. And you get paid to be a human scarecrow with eyeballs.

Just curious since I also work security in NYC.

Do you work for a contract security company ??
That's what it sounds like to me.

You should try to get a city job in the security field.
I once worked at the Aquarium in Coney Island, Bklyn for
6 years. Since it is CITY PROPERTY, be were appointed
Peace Officer Status. We basically had all the equipment that
a cop would carry except for the gun and we had arrest powers.

I've been working in the Hotel industry for the last 11 years as security. It's probably the cream of the crop as far as security salaries go in NYC, especially if you have your Fire Safety Director's license. The cool thing
about most hotels is that you just wear a suit, no cheesy security outfit.

Ray

 

[Lightraven]

Right, Surviving Edged Weapons.

But covering distance isn't really relevant to how knife attacks occur. The sprinting, openly displayed knife attack is so uncommon I can only think of one case of all the knife attacks I've read or seen where that occurred.

Far more common, the knifer closes the distance at a walk. It may be a concealed attack, such as on a prison guard, or an overt "attack" as in suicide-by-cop. Or, it is the victim who is chasing the knifer (security pursuing shoplifter).

JustinCase, I didn't specify shooting with a handgun. We also have shotguns, rifles and submachine guns--the latter two are fully automatic. But I'd go further and say that handguns are very effective in stopping attacks. The problem is that once in a while, they don't stop an attack and it is big news (Dog bites man? Not news. Man bites dog? That's news). Everybody says, "Handguns are pathetic fight stoppers." Compared to A-bombs? Sure. But compared to a baton, pepper spray, or fist that most people bring to a fight, I'll take it.

Of the several dozen shootings by my coworkers that they've told me about (all but two using handguns), not to mention personal experience, every single one terminated the attack--whether physically or psychologically--the attack ended either as bullets flew by or hit. I'm sure our results are significantly better than average for all defensive gun use (for specific reasons relating to motivation), but still--no failures to stop an attack including a few knife guys and a couple machete guys.

Also, I'd point out that bullets can damage bones, causing structural incapacitation, sever motor neurons, causing local paralysis and damage the brain, causing major incapacitation or death. Bleeding isn't the only (or most effective) wounding function of bullets. In a recent Simunition exercise, a "knifer" jumped up and tried to stab me (I was standing about 6 feet away, but I did draw my gun before the attack). I shot him between the eyes before his stroke fell, to paraphrase a good line from Lord of the Rings. That would be an instant incapacitation/death.

 

[Monocrom]

Just curious since I also work security in NYC.

Do you work for a contract security company ??
That's what it sounds like to me.

You should try to get a city job in the security field.

Yup, I work for the 2nd largest security company in the world. (And how they stay in business, I have no clue. Horribly mismanaged, at least the NYC branch anyway).

A security job with the city sounds like it would be sweet. Just can't seem to find one though. Having Peace Officer status shows the city at least takes security more seriously than the private companies do. (While they can't bestow Peace Officer status, there's a lot of things they could do to bring some real Professionalism to the industry).

 

[nohcho]

Yup, I work for the 2nd largest security company in the world. (And how they stay in business, I have no clue. Horribly mismanaged, at least the NYC branch anyway).

A security job with the city sounds like it would be sweet. Just can't seem to find one though. Having Peace Officer status shows the city at least takes security more seriously than the private companies do. (While they can't bestow Peace Officer status, there's a lot of things they could do to bring some real Professionalism to the industry).

My personal experience with security companys is that they all pretty much suck, i have been with three different ones and they all the same, managers come and go all the time, officers turn over rate is very high. I work contracted in Redmon for Microsoft, now you would think that Microsoft, such a high profile company would have decent security, not the case at all.

 

[Justin Case]

Right, Surviving Edged Weapons.

But covering distance isn't really relevant to how knife attacks occur. The sprinting, openly displayed knife attack is so uncommon I can only think of one case of all the knife attacks I've read or seen where that occurred.

Far more common, the knifer closes the distance at a walk. It may be a concealed attack, such as on a prison guard, or an overt "attack" as in suicide-by-cop. Or, it is the victim who is chasing the knifer (security pursuing shoplifter).

JustinCase, I didn't specify shooting with a handgun. We also have shotguns, rifles and submachine guns--the latter two are fully automatic. But I'd go further and say that handguns are very effective in stopping attacks. The problem is that once in a while, they don't stop an attack and it is big news (Dog bites man? Not news. Man bites dog? That's news). Everybody says, "Handguns are pathetic fight stoppers." Compared to A-bombs? Sure. But compared to a baton, pepper spray, or fist that most people bring to a fight, I'll take it.

Of the several dozen shootings by my coworkers that they've told me about (all but two using handguns), not to mention personal experience, every single one terminated the attack--whether physically or psychologically--the attack ended either as bullets flew by or hit. I'm sure our results are significantly better than average for all defensive gun use (for specific reasons relating to motivation), but still--no failures to stop an attack including a few knife guys and a couple machete guys.

Also, I'd point out that bullets can damage bones, causing structural incapacitation, sever motor neurons, causing local paralysis and damage the brain, causing major incapacitation or death. Bleeding isn't the only (or most effective) wounding function of bullets. In a recent Simunition exercise, a "knifer" jumped up and tried to stab me (I was standing about 6 feet away, but I did draw my gun before the attack). I shot him between the eyes before his stroke fell, to paraphrase a good line from Lord of the Rings. That would be an instant incapacitation/death.

Yes, there are a myriad of ways a skilled knifer can get close without your knowing he is a knifer. That isn't the point of the 21 foot drill. The drill is a demonstration of reactionary gap. It isn't meant as a demonstration of a probably knife attack scenario.

Of course bullets have other wounding mechanisms. But the probability of your hitting a bone that causes a stoppage is very low. The probability of a CNS hit against a moving target, causing a stoppage, is also very low. Yes, we all will take even these low probabilities, because the alternative is zero probability. And handguns are long distance weapons, vice baton and hands which are contact distance.

Must've been a pretty fast draw and first shot to hit someone who initiates the action from only 6 feet away.

 

[Lightraven]

Agreed, I think the original point of the Tueller drill has been lost, to an extent. It's not a training scenario, or shouldn't be, it is something your lawyer takes to court if a defensive shooting versus a knife goes to court--which it hopefully shouldn't.

In the Sim scenario, I drew my gun while the "knifer" was still sitting down talking to me. This is because I suddenly realized I wasn't watching his hands, and when I did, there was something underneath them. The second my gun came out, he attacked. Would I draw on a seated talking suspect in real life? Probably not. I was told that I was the only officer to draw prior to the attack--and the only one to really "win." Ha-ha, Kobyashi Maru, kiss my ---!

Seriously, in other knife attack scenarios, the best solution seemed to be keeping the knifer off you with a straight arm while drawing and shooting. In some scenarios, I shot from retention position to the torso to one instructor's approval. But I prefer a single handed extension towards the eye and quick shot to the cerebellum through the ocular cavity. Nothing will end a fight faster or with more certainty. You can miss from the hip and multiple shots may not stop the fight, but putting the muzzle against the eye will not miss and it won't fail. Just keep the muzzle out of contact to prevent out-of-battery problems.

The bad news is your non-gun arm could get cut as you straight arm the knifer's face or chest. But that isn't likely to be fatal.

It's not so much that I devised these responses ahead of time--I wasn't told in the scenarios that I would be attacked with a knife, or that I would be attacked at all. Two CHP officers had a "suspect" suddenly pull a Surefire L6 from his pocket as if pulling a weapon after being primed by watching my knife attack scenario. Whether because he pulled too slowly, or they are just that good, neither officer fired their guns--the only time ever according to the instructor who spent a decade training the best his agency has.

The scenario was supposed to be a mistake shooting, complete with investigation by a real life Officer Involved Shooting investigator with LAPD robbery homicide division. But, with no shooting, it wasn't necessary and nobody had to justify their shooting a guy with a Surefire. Now, if he had pulled a Fenix. . .

Guns can be effective at any range as long as the muzzle can be oriented at a target. For long guns, this can be difficult up close. For handguns, not so much. Some of our shootings are shooting a criminal in contact with our officer. One bad guy grabbed the semiautomatic handgun pointed at his head--and died a second later. Training officers not to use their guns in a deadly force situation, but rely on hands or batons results in the following:

The only death we've had from a knifer--an unarmed off-duty coworker (died before I joined) tried to go hands-on with the knifer, who had just murdered another person in front of our guy.

One NYPD officer tried to baton a knifer last year, and got stabbed in the chest. The upside? The stab hit the officer's metal badge (his literal shield) and broke the blade. Ours are now cloth--gulp! It was recommended the officer use his gun, next time.

 

[Monocrom]

Training officers not to use their guns in a deadly force situation, but rely on hands or batons....

I see the problem now. Please allow me to clarify. Instructors who are "for real" will NEVER teach an officer to rely on empty-hand or baton for situations where use of deadly force would be justified. What they teach is, use what you have in your hands now in order to defend yourself just long enough to create enough distance so that you'll have time to reach for your firearm.

Distance + Time = Effective Defense.

There was a vid from a dash-cam several months ago on YouTube. An officer was confronted by a violent man who jumped him. On the vid, the officer was reaching for a weapon. (Can't recall if it was his baton or pepper-spray. Possibly even his sidearm). Problem was, the guy was right on top of the officer. The officer kept reaching for a weapon on his duty belt. And every time he did, the guy just kept pounding on the officer's head and face! The officer didn't even attempt any empty-hand techniques to at least get the guy off of him, so that he could create enough distance (even a few feet) in order to have enough time to get his spray, baton, or gun out. Lucky for him, his attacker seemed too busy beating on him to even try to go for the officer's gun. It was ridiculous!

On the tape, the officer seemed genuinely surprised that every time he reached down to his duty belt, he got pounded! He just stood in front of the hood of his cruiser, trying to reach for a weapon, and failing miserably due to not initially creating enough distance to have enough time to actually pull out a weapon. The only thing that saved the officer from being beaten to a pulp was a Good Samaritan who stepped in and tackled the attacker.

It's not that you use a baton or empty-hand techniques instead of a firearm, when deadly force is justifed. But you use those techniques to create enough distance & time, so that you can go for your firearm in a deadly encounter.

BTW, if you actually have instructors who teach "Instead of..." rather than "Along with..." I suggest ignoring them because they're full of $#^%!

The only death we've had from a knifer--an unarmed off-duty co-worker (died before I joined) tried to go hands-on with the knifer, who had just murdered another person in front of our guy.

He was unarmed?? Well, that was his first mistake. If the knifer murdered someone else in front of the off-duty LEO, that means the knifer lost the element of surprise. He knew the guy had a knife, but went hands-on against him anyway?? He should not have confronted the knifer. I'm sorry to say, but he made two huge mistakes that got him killed. No disrespect intended.

One NYPD officer tried to baton a knifer last year, and got stabbed in the chest. The upside? The stab hit the officer's metal badge (his literal shield) and broke the blade. Ours are now cloth--gulp! It was recommended the officer use his gun, next time.

Was it a case where the officer happened to have his baton in hand, and was jumped by the knifer. Or one in which he had time to go for his gun, but chose to reach for his baton instead?