Click to Subscribe
Tactics for Repelling Multiple Attackers
Jeremy Bentham Discusses the Need for Ass-Saving Doctrine
© 2016 Jeremy Bentham
DEC/22/16
James,
An idea for your next stick fighting video. Clearly there is a need for instruction in tactics for repelling multiple attackers while armed with a stick or baton. Like how would you fight off your typical three man dindu restitution recovery crew with a stick? You could also include tactics for how two men with sticks can fight three or more attackers. Like the two forlorn Swedish security guards in the train station who were video-taped getting a whuppin’ by a group of a half-dozen or so African migrant hoodlums. Obviously there is a need for such knowledge not only by civilians, but by security guards and police a well, given the documented prevalence of black mob violence today.
Back in the good old days the Army and Marines used to teach group bayonet fighting tactics, both for ganging up on individual enemy soldiers in the initial stages of an assault to whittle down the enemy’s numbers AND to keep from getting ganged up on and skewered yourself.
Being assaulted by multiple attackers is a disparity of force situation. Two or more attackers have the power to give you a beating that could kill you or cripple you for life. Check out this video tape of a linebacker-sized Texas cop being taken down and murdered during a traffic stop by three much smaller Central American dope mules:
There is plenty of evidence that dindu attackers on the street will not be at all morally restrained from inflicting a kill-you-or-cripple-you-for-life beating on their victims. Especially victims of the white oppressor race. Which justifies under the law the use of lethal force to keep from ending up on the receiving end of such a beating.
There are many jurisdictions in our country where average citizens are not allowed to carry firearms or other weapons for their defense, but they can pick up a stick when threatened. Sticks are everywhere. Plus the reality is that even if you are authorized to pack heat, there will still be lot of people among the triers of the facts who will have unrealistic notions about violence and will think you ought to be following the “Chuck Norris Rule” and shouldn’t bring a gun to a "fist fight” (Old White Guys and The Chuck Norris Rule)
Take the case of Arizona vs. Larry Hickey as an example.
“If you aren't familiar with Larry Hickey, he is a shooting instructor affiliated with Tactical Response. A respected and knowledgeable figure in the shooting instruction community within Arizona, he had to defend himself in his own driveway against 3 attackers in Tucson where he lives, November of 2008. The case is instructive because, although Larry was completely within his rights and the law, even choosing to disarm and render aid to his assailants after he wounded them, he was prosecuted zealously - twice!! Ultimately, he won the case. But aside from causing concern about ever having anything happen to you in Pima County (the gubbamint folks there just do NOT like gun people or respect their rights), it also shows how simply being right isn't always enough.”
See also Chapter 11, Case Study: State of Arizona vs. Larry Hickey, “Deadly Force – Understanding Your Right to Self-Defense” by Massad Ayoob (2014)
Larry Hickey shot and wounded two people to keep from being overpowered and beaten/stomped to death (and/or disarmed and shot with his own gun) in his own driveway after being attacked by three exceptionally strong people. People who charged across the street to attack him and his wife. Hickey was tried twice. In both instances the jury was hung. The first time nine jurors voted not guilty and three voted guilty. The second time eight voted not guilty and four voted guilty. The jurors who voted guilty apparently could not get past the belief that Hickey should not have “brought a gun to a fist fight”. This even in gun friendly Arizona and even after the whole disparity of force issue was explained to the jury by Ayoob and other expert witnesses in self-defense law.
So the lesson is clear, if you can use lesser force to repel innocent unarmed attackers, especially ones of the oppressed race and especially if you are a healthy young man, it would probably devolve to your advantage to be able do so. But when push comes to shove do what you have to do to stay alive.
So what do you think James?
Jeremy, your fellow Christian Warrior, Sean Glass, distant relative of Hugh Glass, has requested that I do a comprehensive instruction in stick and knife for survival, which he would like to video. As soon as we can get four of us together we will do this. I am mobile once again, although not fit for competition. I am though, Dindu worthy and will try and do my part before the terminus of my deleterious arc.
Thanks for lighting this fire under my nether parts.
Arming Up for the Race War
the combat space
On Stick Retention
eBook
the year the world took the z-pill
eBook
masculine axis
eBook
battle
eBook
sons of arуas
eBook
on the overton railroad
eBook
all-power-fighting
eBook
your trojan whorse
eBook
the sunset saga complete
PR     Dec 22, 2016

I think Blauer's SPEAR could've saved officer Lundsford. He needed to push down on the top of the head of the guy trying to take him down and back away. After creating space, he should've pushed one guy inot the others and used his flashlight or gone for his sidearm, though they were too close to draw and fire. A knife would've been better. When on the ground, he should've at least tried to pull guard and pull one of the guys on top of him to use as a shield.

He had a cavalier macho attitude and appears to have had little reality-based combat training.
James     Dec 23, 2016

Blauer's spear is excellent for security and doorman. Tony did some serious homework on that.
  Add a new comment below:
Name
Email
Message