preemptive strikes, what's your own rule on them?

Discussion in 'Self Defence' started by Saved_in_Blood, Jan 25, 2014.

  1. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    We got to discussing this in class the other night and my instructor had said his space was about 3 feet if the person is being very aggressive, if he's any further and just talking then he really doesn't worry about it. Of course we discussed body language as well to decide if a first strike was necessary.

    So what is your own personal rule about that? I know it's situational, but just sort of a general rule you go by?
  2. pseudo

    pseudo Padawan

    You really enjoy bringing up hot topics. :p

    I've never been the one to throw the first punch, however up until recently I was always under the impression that the individual who threw the first punch or get physical was the person liable as far as the law was concerned. Hannibal however has disprove that myth so long as he is right.

    I however don't intend on changing my methods, I haven't been in a fight in about 7 years, I've talked my way out of some potentially bad situations and I avoid places that I know I'm likely to in counter problems.
  3. mattt

    mattt Valued Member

    I don't think a distance rule works (for me) as I've been in many situations where things can get a little rough and tumble but not a fighting situation.

    I don't really have a rule, I don't mind if someone gets in my face or hits me first, so that's fine. If anything I might be inclined to walk up to someone and crack them if they are doing bad things that threaten and scare others in a situation where there is no security around.
  4. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    If you are being threaten with bodily harm, it depends on the "level" of threat
  5. Saved_in_Blood

    Saved_in_Blood Valued Member

    Well... they happen to be hot topics, but it's not on purpose. I'm trying to just get a general idea of what others think about things and base my judgments on the general consensus instead of reacting out of pure anger.
  6. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    I'll hit him as soon as I recognise his intention to hit me.
  7. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    JWT explained to me/us at a seminar that you can (in the UK) use force, pre-emptive or otherwise, to prevent a crime being committed, even if that crime is assault upon yourself.
    Seems fair enough to me.
    If someone presents enough signals that they intend to hit me (aggressive dialogue, body language) I'll attempt to hit them first.
  8. bassai

    bassai onwards and upwards ! Moderator Supporter

    I'm not going to ague with that , but just want to add a consideration.
    Your first point of call in the British justice system would be magistrates court , these guys aren't trained all that well and can sometimes take a rather simplistic view on things.
    My dad was a magistrate up until a few years ago , so I asked him how he would view someone in front of him who had thrown the first strike pre-emptively , he told me that unless there was absolutely no other way out he would consider that you started the fight , essentially you had to be backed into a corner with no means of escape at all.
  9. John Titchen

    John Titchen Still Learning Supporter

    I've had to educate a few magistrates.

    How you explain what you did afterwards is crucial.

    Your first point of call isn't the magistrates court, it is the Police and the CPS. Explain yourself properly and you won't face a magistrate.
  10. eggbeater

    eggbeater New Member

    It's a personal judgement call, what I perceive to be threatening you may not and vice versa. It doesn't mean that either of us is wrong it's just how we perceive the threat. As long as you can justify your actions and the methods used are proportionate to the level of threat you'll be ok. My only rule is if you decide to preemptive strike make sure you are fully committed.
  11. Travess

    Travess The Welsh MAPper Supporter

    Below is a Link to the Crown Prosecutions services guidelines to self defence and the Law (UK), you'll notice that there is a section specifically for Pre-emptive strikes...


    Last edited: Jan 25, 2014
  12. Moi

    Moi Warriors live forever x

    What actually happen is rarely what is heard in court. Evidence from '3rd party' spectators is crucial to secure a result in your favour. As is being polite and well spoken in court.
  13. John Titchen

    John Titchen Still Learning Supporter

    I'm not in a position to post at length at the moment, and I've written on this subject at length on MAP elsewhere, particularly in some of the stickied threads.

    Travess' link is a good one.

    The important legal framework (in GB) is provided by Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967 and Section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

    So long as you were not intoxicated, in claiming self defence the onus is now on any prosecution against you to prove that you did not honestly believe that force was necessary, whether that belief was incorrect or not.

    I would like to make the observation that in technical terms (leaving aside the massively important legal and psychological framework) a good preemptive strike is a bit like a jab. Anyone can throw a jab, but to deliver a good jab, in the right place at the right time, and to be physically and mentally ready to do so, that takes practice rather than theorising.
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Technically your first port of call will be the police because that is who lays the charges - knowing the correct wording and articulation is paramount in speaking with us.

    "Yeah he had a mouth on him so I clocked him one before things got heavy" is unlikely to cut it.

    After the police it goes to the crown prosecutor (CPS) - it is an unverified but never wrong fact that they will tend to lay charges in a case with a 75% chance of conviction, so getting the right story out is even more important

    I teach statement making and articulation as a part of my classes, and actually as a separate module

    People get in trouble not so much for what they did but for what they SAY they did
  15. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Dammit! Just saw JWT beat me to it - that'll teach me not to read ahead!!
  16. Travess

    Travess The Welsh MAPper Supporter

    Agreed - We too cover this as a Class, but I think it is woefully overlooked by many, that claim to cover practical self defence, as part of their syllabus, as the physical aspect of any altercation is oft times just a small portion of the whole 'incident'.


  17. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

    I'll throw first if I have too. However, I have this exceptional skill of talking people down ;)
  18. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Replace "pre emptive strike"'with "pre emptive takedown"'and the question (and legality) remains the same
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2014
  19. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    When the police ask you what happened your answer should be "I'd like to consult with a solicitor before I answer any questions."
  20. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    Not very likely to strike first if I am alone, or just the wife and I. My wife on the other hand is a bit hot tempered.

    If I have my children with me it is within arms reach. Maybe further if you smell of alcohol, or act impaired. Appropriate action will be used. I don't believe this is just a cut and dry question. I am probobably not going to touch the abusive drunk lady, but very likely to subdue the angry sober man.

Share This Page