Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

[jmstarry]

Watching & analyzing the beginning of “Line of Fire / Defending Against Handgun Threats,” and excellent 1999 DVD from Darren Levine, et al, left me with two main questions. My preliminary assumption is that I imagine all handgun attackers as being big, fat, and muscular, and, if I cannot run away, the assumption is anyone who points a gun at me first deserves immediate and total incapacitation, thus the following.
1. Point: removing the gun from the attacker is the highest priority. Everything else is subordinate. In the video just after the defender turns away the firearm in one attacker’s hand from being aimed at the defender, Levine instructs the DVD viewer to put weight on pistol, but not how much weight. Is it safe to assume that the defender’s full body weight will improve the effectiveness of breaking the attacker’s one-hand handgun grip? If so, would not the defender gain split-second advantage at this moment by simultaneously turning the barrel’s aim towards a safer “target direction,” stiffening the entire arm of the defender’s gripping hand, hopping both feet about three inches off the ground to momentarily transfer ALL, i.e., 100% of the body weight down the stiff arm to the gripping hand thus creating a significantly weight-to-hand-muscle defender’s advantage over the attacker’s hand-muscle strength which should result in a 99+% chance of breaking the attacker’s grip? Having wrestled in school, I think this “hop” really should be EXPLICITLY and articulately (emphasize it repeatedly from at least three different camera angles & say it out loud repeatedly) integrated into this procedure’s step-by-step instructions. Comments/RSVP.
2. In this video during the defender’s body movement towards the attacker and the weight transfer, the defender’s punching fist does not have the situational timing, distance, etc. to wind up and deliver a knockout punch, thus, the short-punches to the throat and/or face 3+ times. QUESTION ?: New to this entire arena of human behavior, I plead ignorance, however, would not any quick and short fist punches to face/throat be less effective, that is, significantly less effective, than open-hand, straight finger jabs to attacker’s soft-tissue eyes? That is, does not the situation’s presentation of a sudden short distance give the result’s advantage to a highly vulnerable/soft tissue eye attack versus a lighter-short-range-multiple-fist punch to facial hard bone or hard-muscle throat, being much lighter than one Ali knockout punch? Assumption: anyone who points a gun at me first deserves immediate and total incapacitation via permanent eye damage and then near-simultaneous severe groin and knee damage. Right? Comments, please. RSVP.

[kevinmack]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

1. No.

2. No

[jmstarry]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

Thanks for the voluminous reply. Gives a lot of credence to your elaborate choice of words. Not.

[cjs-dad]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote jmstarry:

Thanks for the voluminous reply. Gives a lot of credence to your elaborate choice of words. Not.

Some people are just not long winded LOL

Instead of a sarcastic response how about trying “Kevin would you care to elaborate on why my assumptions are incorrect”

[jmstarry]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

“Kevin would you care to elaborate on why my assumptions are incorrect”

[tzrider]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote jmstarry:

Watching & analyzing the beginning of “Line of Fire / Defending Against Handgun Threats,” and excellent 1999 DVD from Darren Levine, et al, left me with two main questions. My preliminary assumption is that I imagine all handgun attackers as being big, fat, and muscular, and, if I cannot run away, the assumption is anyone who points a gun at me first deserves immediate and total incapacitation, thus the following.
1. Point: removing the gun from the attacker is the highest priority. Everything else is subordinate. In the video just after the defender turns away the firearm in one attacker’s hand from being aimed at the defender, Levine instructs the DVD viewer to put weight on pistol, but not how much weight. Is it safe to assume that the defender’s full body weight will improve the effectiveness of breaking the attacker’s one-hand handgun grip? If so, would not the defender gain split-second advantage at this moment by simultaneously turning the barrel’s aim towards a safer “target direction,” stiffening the entire arm of the defender’s gripping hand, hopping both feet about three inches off the ground to momentarily transfer ALL, i.e., 100% of the body weight down the stiff arm to the gripping hand thus creating a significantly weight-to-hand-muscle defender’s advantage over the attacker’s hand-muscle strength which should result in a 99+% chance of breaking the attacker’s grip? Having wrestled in school, I think this “hop” really should be EXPLICITLY and articulately (emphasize it repeatedly from at least three different camera angles & say it out loud repeatedly) integrated into this procedure’s step-by-step instructions. Comments/RSVP.

Are you familiar with RCAT? Redirect, Control, Attack, Take away.

At this moment, you’re not trying to take the gun, you’re trying to Redirect and Control it. You need enough weight moving forward and down to drive the attacker’s hand down to his own hip. Hopping around and trying to bear all of your weight on the gun delays the action and compromises your ability to attack quickly.

As you move the gun to his hip, you attack:

quote jmstarry:

2. In this video during the defender’s body movement towards the attacker and the weight transfer, the defender’s punching fist does not have the situational timing, distance, etc. to wind up and deliver a knockout punch, thus, the short-punches to the throat and/or face 3+ times. QUESTION ?: New to this entire arena of human behavior, I plead ignorance, however, would not any quick and short fist punches to face/throat be less effective, that is, significantly less effective, than open-hand, straight finger jabs to attacker’s soft-tissue eyes? That is, does not the situation’s presentation of a sudden short distance give the result’s advantage to a highly vulnerable/soft tissue eye attack versus a lighter-short-range-multiple-fist punch to facial hard bone or hard-muscle throat, being much lighter than one Ali knockout punch? Assumption: anyone who points a gun at me first deserves immediate and total incapacitation via permanent eye damage and then near-simultaneous severe groin and knee damage. Right? Comments, please. RSVP.

You answered your own question in the bolded text above. The priority is to take the gun away.

You don’t need to poke his eyes out to do this and trying to do so carries real risk that you’d miss his eyes and destroy your own fingers. It’s a safe assumption that you’ll have a massive adrenaline dump at the time and the motor control to target the eyes probably isn’t there.

Your attack should hurt the guy, but not at the cost of hurting yourself in the process. The attack gives your attacker something to think about while you take the gun away.

If you feel your attacker “deserves immediate and total incapacitation,” shoot him with the gun you just took away. :D:

[metta-world-krav-maga]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote jmstarry:

“Kevin would you care to elaborate on why my assumptions are incorrect”

Few things.

1. He knows. Totally cool to ask why and for people to elaborate, and even to challenge if you think you’re right, just trust that he knows.

2. I am long-winded, and even I had a hard time trying to figure out what you were asking. If you want better answers, ask better questions. Not in terms of content, but rather clarity and intelligibility. Use a few less commas, a few more line breaks and periods/question marks.

3. In a high adrenaline situation, bigger targets are better than smaller targets. Also, you want to scramble their computer/disrupt their OODA loop, not hopefully try to temporarily blind them. Eye rakes and eye strikes are great for close range or when you have less available weapons at your disposal. Gun defense from the front though, here you want to smash.

[kmyoshi]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

Think of putting weight on the gun like holding someone/something down. It’s not literally putting your body’s weight on it e.g: sitting on them, but it is more like pinning the gun in place. To do this, your body has to be going forward, to the attacker, not back and away from them. A note is that your arm should also be locked or fully extended as if you’re punching the gun down to the attacker’s hip/waist. This will help with the “weight transfer” part as it’ll keep pressure on the gun.

[jmstarry]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

Sir, thank you for your two responses. Did you notice that I asked 6 questions? Would you please indicate which two questions you are answering? Or, better yet, please answer all six.
Thanks a million!!!

[kevinmack]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

My brevity was based on the fact that your question shows a total misunderstanding of the gun defense you watched. Your focus is on the wrong thing and you dont seem to grasp the importance of certain things. In order to explain why your questions are wrong I would have to teach you the whole gun defense and I dont fel like tyiping that out.
There are many things that you cant learn from a dvd.
That being said here is an old video I shot on the subject. Its one of the first videos I shot so its a bit rough and drawn out.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu_Em02F7Ag

[jmstarry]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote KevinMack:

My brevity was based on the fact that your question shows a total misunderstanding of the gun defense you watched. Your focus is on the wrong thing and you dont seem to grasp the importance of certain things. In order to explain why your questions are wrong I would have to teach you the whole gun defense and I dont fel like tyiping that out.
There are many things that you cant learn from a dvd.
That being said here is an old video I shot on the subject. Its one of the first videos I shot so its a bit rough and drawn out.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu_Em02F7Ag

From your: “total misunderstanding of the gun defense you watched. Your focus is on the wrong thing and you dont seem to grasp the importance of certain things…” you have offered me what I can only interpret as a tone of arrogance and authoritarianism that have alienated me. Notice the other replies do not do this. You have fulfilled my stereotype of the macho martial artist. Instead of replying like this maybe you should stay off of this forum and stick to face-to-face instruction. Maybe you have more patience there, maybe, but I cannot help but wonder in a fashion similar to your response herein how you like to intimidate novices and what your childhood must have been like, not to mention what your life is like now. Sorry, but at 65 I am too old to put up with your type any longer and since this is a forum I do not have to. Adios.

[tzrider]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote jmstarry:

Would you please indicate which two questions you are answering? Or, better yet, please answer all six.
Thanks a million!!!

Since you’re talking about Kevin’s tone, take a moment to consider how you may come across.

Go read your first post and find the six questions. Oh, they’re in there, but they aren’t easy to parse. If you want better help, ask better questions.

[don]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

If no one here is gonna tell me what I want to hear, you can all

[connorb]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

There was an excellent gun-disarming VHS training video that made the circuit a number of years ago by a guy named Bob taylor and some other guy whose name I can’t remember from back in the 90’s.

They loaded various types of guns(single action,double action, long rifles etc.) with plastic bullets which are relatively close to the initial velocity of an actual round that has been fired. They then tried various gun-disarming techniques of various martial arts.

Long story short, I highly recommend Krav instructors find and review the tapes as a possible addition to your training curriculum. It will be an eye-opener to some of the techniques that I’ve been seeing.

The name of the tape was “Unarmed and Fearless” or something to that effect. The problem is that it was the 90’s so it was a VHS type training tape.

Good luck

[don]

Re: Darren Levine’s pistol defense DVD, 1999

quote ConnorB:

Long story short, I highly recommend Krav instructors find and review the tapes as a possible addition to your training curriculum. It will be an eye-opener to some of the techniques that I’ve been seeing.

Care to share what you think the learning points would be?

[Author]

Posts