TexasCHLforum.com

WildBill wrote:

HerbM wrote:The jokes would be funny except that it concerns me that some people reading this might think them serious or actual practice.

It is most effective to have set verbiage to use when avoiding and repelling a criminal attack, and to use it EVEN IF the threat is so close that warning and response must occur together.

I recommend the "BACK OFF!" sequence because it works so effectively UP TO the actual response and trying to insert additional wording in a situation that is already fraught with live threatening fear and peril is just not a good idea.

For a useful way to Avoid Criminal Attacks, please see my outline with some useful detail here: http://www.meetup.com/AustinCombatives/ ... d/10163916

You definitely do NOT want to be saying anything that will not do you service when played back by MSNBC or ABC over the following months as you await the Grand Jury decision or your trial. Seriously.

I also hope that people realize that certain posts are jokes and that their statements could be used against them.

This forum has rules that won't allow me to post exactly what I would say but the first word would be FREEZE and the second word would just depend on the person I am screaming freeze to.

Then there are situations I would say nothing and begin firing.

Neither of these comments would have a negative impact if read by a DA in determining what to do if I fire in self defense because I will only be firing if absolutely necessary and there will be no doubt about who the good guy is.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

WildBill wrote:

HerbM wrote:The jokes would be funny except that it concerns me that some people reading this might think them serious or actual practice.

It is most effective to have set verbiage to use when avoiding and repelling a criminal attack, and to use it EVEN IF the threat is so close that warning and response must occur together.

I recommend the "BACK OFF!" sequence because it works so effectively UP TO the actual response and trying to insert additional wording in a situation that is already fraught with live threatening fear and peril is just not a good idea.

For a useful way to Avoid Criminal Attacks, please see my outline with some useful detail here: http://www.meetup.com/AustinCombatives/ ... d/10163916

You definitely do NOT want to be saying anything that will not do you service when played back by MSNBC or ABC over the following months as you await the Grand Jury decision or your trial. Seriously.

I also hope that people realize that certain posts are jokes and that their statements could be used against them.

This forum has rules that won't allow me to post exactly what I would say but the first word would be FREEZE and the second word would just depend on the person I am screaming freeze to.

Then there are situations I would say nothing and begin firing.

Neither of these comments would have a negative impact if read by a DA in determining what to do if I fire in self defense because I will only be firing if absolutely necessary and there will be no doubt about who the good guy is.

"Back off" or "Stop - back off!" is viable during the approach phase. "Freeze!" during the initiation of the attack works better in the movies than in real life. The reason is that it's not clear direction in any language, is not widely used by police, and is not understood by non english speakers at all.

There's also a world of difference in the effects of screaming versus issuing commands.

The implied use of expletives for emphasis has no upside for good guys on the street and enough downsides to make it clearly unproductive.

"Don't move" is a much better initial command (you'll soon realize you can't continue to just look at each other and you'll have to give a series of directions after that) because it's unambiguous and close enough to the same phrase in Spanish that it's almost always understood. That's a major consideration in Texas and many other areas of the country as well.

Excaliber wrote:"Don't move" is a much better initial command (you'll soon realize you can't continue to just look at each other and you'll have to give a series of directions after that) because it's unambiguous and close enough to the same phrase in Spanish that it's almost always understood. That's a major consideration in Texas and many other areas of the country as well.

That's one of the reasons my most frequent verbalization in practice is "NO!"

I may say other things depending on the totality of the situation in the scenario practiced but the most common is a simple "NO!" with or without a stop gesture with my support hand, depending on the distance. The voice tone and body language are enough to make myself clear to dogs, so humans have no excuse.

Shoot Straight wrote:

Excaliber wrote:"Don't move" is a much better initial command (you'll soon realize you can't continue to just look at each other and you'll have to give a series of directions after that) because it's unambiguous and close enough to the same phrase in Spanish that it's almost always understood. That's a major consideration in Texas and many other areas of the country as well.

That's one of the reasons my most frequent verbalization in practice is "NO!"

I may say other things depending on the totality of the situation in the scenario practiced but the most common is a simple "NO!" with or without a stop gesture with my support hand, depending on the distance. The voice tone and body language are enough to make myself clear to dogs, so humans have no excuse.

"NO" is pretty universal. If the perceived aggressor doesn't understand "NO", then it's time...maybe?

If it comes to that, Heaven forbid, it will be time.

Oldgringo wrote:

Shoot Straight wrote:

Excaliber wrote:"Don't move" is a much better initial command (you'll soon realize you can't continue to just look at each other and you'll have to give a series of directions after that) because it's unambiguous and close enough to the same phrase in Spanish that it's almost always understood. That's a major consideration in Texas and many other areas of the country as well.

That's one of the reasons my most frequent verbalization in practice is "NO!"

I may say other things depending on the totality of the situation in the scenario practiced but the most common is a simple "NO!" with or without a stop gesture with my support hand, depending on the distance. The voice tone and body language are enough to make myself clear to dogs, so humans have no excuse.

"NO" is pretty universal. If the perceived aggressor doesn't understand "NO", then it's time...maybe?

If it comes to that, Heaven forbid, it will be time.

"NO" may have application some situations during the approach phase of an attack, but I don't favor it because it's not clear and specific and can be exploited by a street wise BG, as in:"No what?" as he continues his final approach.

This weekend I was walking toward the bank in downtown San Antonio to get some cash from the ATM. I was being approached by what appeared to be a panhandler but I was not waiting to find out. I simply said. Not interested, go away. He stopped and started to say something. I interrupted and repeated the words... "I think I said to go away!" in a firmer tone. he mumbled something as he walked the other direction. I am betting what he mumbled wasn't thank you.

03Lightningrocks wrote:This weekend I was walking toward the bank in downtown San Antonio to get some cash from the ATM. I was being approached by what appeared to be a panhandler but I was not waiting to find out. I simply said. Not interested, go away. He stopped and started to say something. I interrupted and repeated the words... "I think I said to go away!" in a firmer tone. he mumbled something as he walked the other direction. I am betting what he mumbled wasn't thank you.

This is pretty good.

Having taught this a lot, perhaps you will be receptive if I offer a suggestion to improve this a little?

Leave out the "I think I said...." or even "I said..." or "Man, ..." -- they add nothing, dilute your command (did you say it or not), and most important take up MORE TIME in a situation where seconds can easily count.

Using "Not interrest..." leaves room for argument and criminals just want to ENGAGE YOU; they don't care about WHAT particular just if they can get you into a back and forth.

You say, "Not interested" and they say (something like), "You haven't heard what I said yet", or some such. They ask, "You have the time" and someone responds with "No" and they say, "You have a cell phone, check your phone...."

Avoid playing into the "conversation" game.

One exception that I will use WHEN IT SEEMS it is safe (that is there is enough time and distance based on the context) is a simple, "No Thanks you."

I use this in response to just about anything -- it actually works best when it MAKES NO SENSE. Example: "What time is it?" "No thank you."

It serves as what NLP refers to as a break state; it doesn't play into the aggressor's game; and usually by the time their brain recovers from the non sequitur the moment (and you) has past.

It also starts with NO.

You can try this -- there is a timing component to it -- with Telephone COLD CALLERS and PAN HANDLERS to practice so it is good for something else besides actual criminal approaches. (You get regular chances to practice.)

It will shut down EVERY COLD CALLER if you say this at the right moment -- they don't have a script for this. If you say "not interested" they come back with something like "I am not selling anything we just need your opinion." etc.

I use this (No Thank You) on panhandlers even when I am in my car with the windows up, air conditioning on, and radio playing -- it doesn't even matter if they can't hear me as long as I deliver it with full congruity and intention.

Extra bonus: Most people are actually POLITE about it. Cold callers either thank me or just abruptly hang up themselves. Panhandlers almost invariable SMILE but always move on.


It may seem that I am way picky on these techniques and that is true since I have been practicing, perfecting, and teaching these for about 5 years. (And I also an NLP trainer and hypnotist experience in how humans process language both consciously and unconsciously.

--
HerbM

HerbM wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:This weekend I was walking toward the bank in downtown San Antonio to get some cash from the ATM. I was being approached by what appeared to be a panhandler but I was not waiting to find out. I simply said. Not interested, go away. He stopped and started to say something. I interrupted and repeated the words... "I think I said to go away!" in a firmer tone. he mumbled something as he walked the other direction. I am betting what he mumbled wasn't thank you.

This is pretty good.

Having taught this a lot, perhaps you will be receptive if I offer a suggestion to improve this a little?

Leave out the "I think I said...." or even "I said..." or "Man, ..." -- they add nothing, dilute your command (did you say it or not), and most important take up MORE TIME in a situation where seconds can easily count.

Using "Not interrest..." leaves room for argument and criminals just want to ENGAGE YOU; they don't care about WHAT particular just if they can get you into a back and forth.

You say, "Not interested" and they say (something like), "You haven't heard what I said yet", or some such. They ask, "You have the time" and someone responds with "No" and they say, "You have a cell phone, check your phone...."

Avoid playing into the "conversation" game.

One exception that I will use WHEN IT SEEMS it is safe (that is there is enough time and distance based on the context) is a simple, "No Thanks you."

I use this in response to just about anything -- it actually works best when it MAKES NO SENSE. Example: "What time is it?" "No thank you."

It serves as what NLP refers to as a break state; it doesn't play into the aggressor's game; and usually by the time their brain recovers from the non sequitur the moment (and you) has past.

It also starts with NO.

You can try this -- there is a timing component to it -- with Telephone COLD CALLERS and PAN HANDLERS to practice so it is good for something else besides actual criminal approaches. (You get regular chances to practice.)

It will shut down EVERY COLD CALLER if you say this at the right moment -- they don't have a script for this. If you say "not interested" they come back with something like "I am not selling anything we just need your opinion." etc.

I use this (No Thank You) on panhandlers even when I am in my car with the windows up, air conditioning on, and radio playing -- it doesn't even matter if they can't hear me as long as I deliver it with full congruity and intention.

Extra bonus: Most people are actually POLITE about it. Cold callers either thank me or just abruptly hang up themselves. Panhandlers almost invariable SMILE but always move on.


It may seem that I am way picky on these techniques and that is true since I have been practicing, perfecting, and teaching these for about 5 years. (And I also an NLP trainer and hypnotist experience in how humans process language both consciously and unconsciously.

--
HerbM

I think you are over analysing it a bit. This situation is really not that difficult and picking out adjectives don't mean a whole lot to a crack head looking for a hand out. Get away means get away no matter how a person is comfortable conveying it. What works for one person may not work for another. Believe me when I tell you, I am not a person who looks like he should be trifled with.

I would shout out something incredibly inane in an attempt to break their OODA loop. If i was being robbed at a pizza place CHEEZUS CRUST!

Excaliber wrote:"Don't move" is a much better initial command (you'll soon realize you can't continue to just look at each other and you'll have to give a series of directions after that) because it's unambiguous and close enough to the same phrase in Spanish that it's almost always understood. That's a major consideration in Texas and many other areas of the country as well.

"Don't move" may have application some situations during the approach phase of an attack, but I don't favor it because it's not clear and specific and can be exploited by a street wise BG, as in "Don't move what?" as he continues his final approach or just pretends he doesn't hear you.

Shooting him is clear and unambiguous.

gringo pistolero wrote:..."abraham"....

Shooting him is clear and unambiguous.

Actually, lightingrocks you are UNDER ANALYZYING it :)

It doesn't matter if the crack head does get your words -- you want him to but you give it your best effort.

All this is for HIM, FOR YOU, and FOR WITNESSES.

And if he ISN"T a crack head but someone who is only a littler altered and understands your meaning through the fog then that is a GOOD THING.

We practice this. We know pretty much how it will go down, whether you practice it or not.

Not practicing it is like expecting to hit what you aim at without proper technique or practice.

I have watched too many beginners get tongue tied at just a LITTLE PRESSURE from the "bad guy".

Come try it. If you are great at it you will know and if not you will know to practice.

HerbM wrote:Actually, lightingrocks you are UNDER ANALYZYING it :)

It doesn't matter if the crack head does get your words -- you want him to but you give it your best effort.

All this is for HIM, FOR YOU, and FOR WITNESSES.

And if he ISN"T a crack head but someone who is only a littler altered and understands your meaning through the fog then that is a GOOD THING.

We practice this. We know pretty much how it will go down, whether you practice it or not.

Not practicing it is like expecting to hit what you aim at without proper technique or practice.

I have watched too many beginners get tongue tied at just a LITTLE PRESSURE from the "bad guy".

Come try it. If you are great at it you will know and if not you will know to practice.

I will respectfully disagree. It is really not complicated at all. Get the hell away from me works just fine. As does any other words telling a person to back off. Saying it with the conviction and tonality that says you aren't kidding is the key. You can say please and if the tone of your voice is forceful, they get the message. I am talking from my personal experience, not some book I read. There is nothing magic about it at all. What causes most folks to get into trouble is allowing a person to get to close before saying anything. The trick is to not feel bad for telling a person to get away from you. That is the hard part for some. Fear of being rude is another problem for some.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

HerbM wrote:Actually, lightingrocks you are UNDER ANALYZYING it :)

It doesn't matter if the crack head does get your words -- you want him to but you give it your best effort.

All this is for HIM, FOR YOU, and FOR WITNESSES.

And if he ISN"T a crack head but someone who is only a littler altered and understands your meaning through the fog then that is a GOOD THING.

We practice this. We know pretty much how it will go down, whether you practice it or not.

Not practicing it is like expecting to hit what you aim at without proper technique or practice.

I have watched too many beginners get tongue tied at just a LITTLE PRESSURE from the "bad guy".

Come try it. If you are great at it you will know and if not you will know to practice.

I will respectfully disagree. It is really not complicated at all. Get the heck away from me works just fine. As does any other words telling a person to back off. Saying it with the conviction and tonality that says you aren't kidding is the key. You can say please and if the tone of your voice is forceful, they get the message. I am talking from my personal experience, not some book I read. There is nothing magic about it at all. What causes most folks to get into trouble is allowing a person to get to close before saying anything. The trick is to not feel bad for telling a person to get away from you. That is the hard part for some. Fear of being rude is another problem for some.

Bold and clear instruction to back off or else.

I am new here but would like to throw in my 02.
Most comments made above are about what is percieved an actual attack, ie "BG". But in my mind he is not a bad guy "legally" until i either, see a weapon, experience aggresion either facial expressions or with his movements, or am physically attacked.
Just a few examples but my point is that just because someone comes up to you for whatever reason, they MIGHT not be a BG but say a deaf panhandler wanting to hand you a little card that says "I AM DEAF", then looking for a handout. By you saying backoff etc may not have been understood and then you assume the wrong intentions and bang, because he did not "back off" and you are going to jail.
I feel that, if approached in anyway other than being charged i would put up my left hand in a universal signal to stop, yell loud STOP with my body turned that my right hand is gripping my sidearm, but still holstered. If that person still approaches i feel that they would almost have to grab my left hand for me to then pull and discharge. Of course their demaner would play a BIG part in the scenario of course.
just my 02 of course.
Thoughts?
Michael