This is what passes for self defense in Boston

Any person who has an option to flee danger and does not so they can mix it up with their attacker is a moron.If you disagree with me keep it to yourslf because I am done talking to stupid people.


Glad to see you have such a high opinion of LE and other similar professions.

(Just a reminder that not every situation is so cut and dry or deserves opinions that might unintentionally come off as a little smug.)
 
It's not about being the tough guy it's about survival. If he has you backed in to a corner you should try to do something at least rather than take it like a punching bag.

As for women who don't have the strength, all the more reason for them to be armed to be able to defend themselves.

I never said anything about taking it like a punching bag, but your first option should be to leave the situation, if you can't then its time to fight and fight dirty.


I'm all for women arming themselves, while it can be a great equalizer, it is only another tool in an arsenal.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Supermoto, at least they are taking the class. At that point its up to them, but at least they are there on our doorstep -minds open and aware of the possibilities of evil directly affecting them in their world. Perhaps open to the challenging the laws that make them victims. These women are our mothers, sisters, lovers, friends, children, and spouses. So I read this article and get angry at the mockery, yet I have a twinkle in my eye that perhaps at least 1 of those 12 will get it and open her eyes and tell a friend and get her involved and able.

Yeah it would be great if they all carried, took kung-fu, and mastered Vulcan death grips. But it all boils down to awareness and self-preservation. She or he has to realize that no one else is responsible for their safety and they must what steps needed to preserve it.

Without that everything else is naught.
 
Glad to see you have such a high opinion of LE and other similar professions.

(Just a reminder that not every situation is so cut and dry or deserves opinions that might unintentionally come off as a little smug.)

I think you misunderstood his comment. In fact, I'm almost sure of it. Remember that the topic here is civilians, not police. I'm sure that pbearperry can defend his statement if he deems it necessary. Suffice it to say that a police officer has a duty to face the type of danger that a civilian should try to avoid when possible. A comparison between the two is not valid.
 
Back
Top Bottom