Okay, so I also am a member of Martialtalk.com and I literally just posted this thread, so I'm just going to copy and paste what I said there, because I'd like to get the perspective from two different communities. So here it goes:
What you think you will do and what can happen are two different things and too many variables for one solid answer.
I would most likely go into the nearest store and ask the staff to call security. Other than that, as Chadderz said, too many variables. Edit - thinking about it. Two women in a fight with each other are probably not going to be involving others. Elderly or children most likely would be quite safe.
Honestly man, I pay taxes for that sort of thing and every single policeman is better trained than me in deescalation, threat levels, self defense, etc., and every single one of them is better equipped to address that sort of situation. Plus, I'm a coward. I don't owe anything to some random old person. Maybe it's a Nazi! I have no idea. There's a very limited number of people that I'm willing to be brave for, as for the rest they can take their own chances. Edit: Apologies to the mods. I was careless and slipped into a colloquialism appropriate for the deadly streets but not for MAP or my dear old Granny. Sorry MAP, sorry Granny.
I would just generally avoid what ever sort of confrontation comes up, i might be inclined to do something if someone was victimizing someone pretty much helpless, but i'd be loathe to actually come to blows with a stranger over a stranger, particularly with little context.
Morality is the facade that we use to dignify our ego. Before intervening in situations that offend our morality, we must ask ourselves whether there is any NECESSITY to intervene physically, and whether the level of our intervention is REASONABLE. NECESSARY and REASONABLE: Two essential words that will serve you well in life. I've actually just attended a weekend seminar with Hock Hochheim here in London - someone who has worked as an investigator and consults on use of force cases frequently - and he suggests that "everything is either an interview (ie. an investigation) or an ambush." I'm inclined to agree. Before engaging then, we should educate ourselves about what is going on: WHO are these people, and WHO am i to intervene? WHAT is happening? WHY is it happening? WHERE are we? Does the environment permit/restrict my options? HOW should i intervene? WHEN should i intervene? Given that EVERY violent physical engagement is potentially fatal, the ONLY viable justification for a citizen to engage a target with physical violence is that they observed clear indicators that loss of life was imminent. If this is not the case, it is easy to argue that the decision to engage was unnecessary, excessive, and reckless given the limited benefits of doing so. Add your knife to the mix, and even if it's not drawn, you've now massively increased the chances of your engagement ending fatally. In summation then, if you are carrying a weapon, it is even MORE dangerous for you to physically intervene in a situation - not just for you, but for everyone there. The fact that your sensibilities have been offended is therefore no justification in endangering the lives of everyone present, with your lack of training, knowledge, and tactical capability. If someone's about to die though, that's a very different story. There is a fine line between bravery and stupidity. I do not condemn anyone for wanting to protect themselves and others, and who wants to right the wrongs of society. I applaud them in fact. I only insist that their planning and execution is strategically and fundamentally sound. It is also worth noting that some of the worst injuries i have ever attended to have been to people who have intervened in situations that turned out to be beyond their capability - one lad literally has his face sheared off and almost bled out while i was trying to hold it back on - so i cannot stress how important it is to accurately predict the risks that are involved.
Oh yeah, meant to say. Carrying a knife is the stupidest thing ever. You might just as likely drop it and have it used against you.
Not necessarily Chadderz. Carrying for stupid reasons, acting with stupidity and immersing oneself in stupid situations? Now that's stupid. Take semi-pro MMA for instance: Stupid games, stupid prizes, stupid people rendered stupider because of the irreversible brain damage they've sustained. Our species is prone to doing stupid things without any regard for the consequences. Change that last bit though, and it's no longer stupid - it's a calculated risk...
What is the real crime rate in this place? Who is involved in these violent altercations? As a result what is the real chance of you being the victim of an assault there (as opposed to choosing to become involved in one)? And if it's so very terrible, why go there? Mitch
What to consenting adults do in a cage can not really be paired with carrying a weapon with intent to use if necessary (judged by the person carrying it). Although you have a fair point. Carrying a knife for stupid reasons is stupid.
Choosing to go to the cinema or to meet friends in an environment where one feels so threatened you must carry a knife (not just a knife, a bigger knife than normal!) counts as carrying for stupid reasons in my book. Either; 1. The environment really is that dangerous that I need to be able to deal lethal force at a moments notice, in which case I won't go there by choice. or 2. The environment really is not that dangerous, in which case carrying a big knife is dangerous paranoia. Mitch
I believe they are comparable in terms of the thought process to engage in either activity - or indeed ANY activity carrying a degree of risk. When managing risk, our thought process ought to involve two major things: 1. Reducing the LIKELIHOOD of bad things happening. 2. Reducing the IMPACT of bad things happening. Of course, that means the safest way to deal with the problem is to simply not be there. With that in mind, i would argue that choosing to frequently partake in full contact combat sports (and the training of) is - at least in this day and age - perhaps even more dangerous than choosing to carry a knife. The latter is done on a regular basis by millions of people all around the world, including really nasty places, with relatively few injuries or deaths (per capita) occurring as a result. On the other hand, being frequently hit in the head and having your joints stressed is most likely going to result in more cons than pros. Furthermore, when assessing alternatives that bring similar physical and mental benefits, it certainly brings into question the idea of martial arts as a whole! Hence, from a risk management perspective at least, carrying a knife is safer and less costly than doing MMA, and if higher risk = higher stupidity, carrying a knife could therefore be considered a wiser choice altogether... See what i did there? But alas, people being people, we will always choose to do the things that make us feel good over the things that are good for us. The only option left then is to have contingencies ready, and go about our stupid business in a more intelligent way
Technically i could lock myself in an underground bunker and have my food delivered. Equally, i could do a 9-5 desk job that didn't involve the dangers that my career exposes me to. I could also do with losing a bit of weight, and working more on my cardio and flexibility. Unfortunately though, when it comes to making rational choices in their lifestyle, human beings are more prone to finding ways to facilitate their preferences than to restrict them. So before we do something potentially hazardous, there are two solutions we must consider:- 1. Just don't do it at all. 2. Find a better way of doing it. If it's part of your chosen lifestyle to go to dangerous places (Londoners are the perfect example of people who could quite easily frequent only nice safe places, but still prefer to visit dodgy ones because they're more interesting!), then i would only urge that proper contingencies are taken, and you stay aware of what is going on around you. Equally, if one of your contingencies involves the carrying of any particular weapon system, ensure that you are sufficiently equipped, trained, and ready to employ that weapon system when the time comes. Any social, legal, mental, or physical consequences of its delivery should also be considered and prepared for accordingly. So long as it is done so intelligently and responsibly then, i see no problem with it. Good education and assessment are key in formulating logical and workable strategies If of course your weapon selection is based on "knives kill people and people are scared of knives, so i'm going to carry one" then i would say that your perspective needs a bit of work...
1. Breaking up a fight is legally different from 'defense of others' (thus invoking the "good samaritan" clause in some areas). What are you aiming for? 2. Are you a violence professional (paid to keep the peace through force)? Better leave the fight breaking to the pros. 3. Best time to break up a fight is when one side is not that heated enough (can still be reasoned with). However, you must have the quality of having a presence that is enough to deter people from acting out. Like this guy: [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erlw-ODVZxU"]Fight on NYC 6 Train - YouTube[/ame] 4. The presence of weapons DEMAND commensurate responses. Don't be a doofus breaking up crap like this: warning NSFW: Spoiler [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-jUTvrsrjE"]Street Fight Philippines with Knives stabs man - YouTube[/ame] Innocents are getting harmed? Evacuate them. Don't stick around the trouble brewing. Breaking up fights through expertise in violence may be good for macho fantasies, but keeping people safe (even by running away carrying another person) is more heroic. If you dropped your own knife, it's probably you're not comfortable with the knife and either you didn't practice enough with it or you bought the wrong knife in the first place. Same with a gun. You think it's stupid probably because of your own local culture, but other cultures would think you stupid if you go to their areas unarmed. Local wisdom is very important. It's how they survived in their areas in the first place.
Barnacles, did I read you wrong, or were you seriously thinking about brandishing a large knife at two girls having an argument in the mall? Would you be prepared to spill their guts across the food court, or slash big chunks out of their bodies, limbs and faces? You'd feel ok with yourself after disfiguring someone, causing them to have to defecate in a bag for the rest of their life, or worse yet have the blame and vengeance of their familiy hanging over you for killing their sibling/child/parent/spouse? Bingo. Except you don't get to use your shiny new knife, so your plan does have that going against it I wouldn't be so sure about that... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/u...r-longstanding-rules-on-using-force.html?_r=0 Ah yes, the old "she may have looked like an innocent old lady, but she told me she embroided swastikas for the SS as a girl" defence! I totally agree with this. But doesn't that contradict what you're saying below? Because aren't those cultures essentially about being macho, where men carry knives optimised for fighting? That's how those areas became dangerous in the first place!
Bottom line: A mall where young women give each other a slap every now and then is a safer mall than one in which people with knives stalk about looking for trouble to "sort out". ...and by "sort out" I mean: "escalate into a far more potentially lethal or life-changing situation".
Not quite. Certain areas in the provinces abound with REAL wild life (snakes, lizards, etc.). And some areas in the city often prey on outsiders managing to wander into the place. No face-off fighting, just predatory ambushes. As much as possible, avoiding bad blood is the norm, as bad blood really is bad, can lead to your entire family wiped out. The weaker the governmental control (including wildlife control) in the area, the more the locals tend to fend off for themselves. Even the ladies.
Do you think that's what's happening here as the OP decides to carry the larger of his selection of knives to visit the mall based on some YouTube footage of fights there? Mitch
