Only if you're confident enough in your ability that you can chose to reserve what you've got. If you're not sure that you can defend without fighting hard, and you're in a situation where that's actually necessary, then you probably need to go all out... and it's self defense.

But now we have an even funnier target. Psycho... pick your catagory. Some of us have actually studied evolution, and are familiar with the usual standard creationist/ID tricks, and will not fall for the obvious nonsense (like "fossils standing up disprove evolution"). If you want, I can even give you a forum full of biologists that can answer any questions you may have, and disprove anything false you may have heard with actual information that can be checked and verified. The fact that you just lumped the Big Bang in with Evolution shows that you're REALLY far off base right now (they're completely different theories, one having absolutely nothing to do with the other). If you actually want to learn, I can help, mostly by pointing you to experts that can really give you real, verifiable information.

JaronK

If you're not that confident in your fighting ability, you're better off disabling and running. Facing a psycho out to kill you is one thing, but that solution works as well. It's not my job to take down serial killers for the police.

If you're capable of disabling your opponent and running, then you're plenty good at fighting, now aren't you? If you've disabled your opponent, you've already won... running becomes unnecessary (and, assuming we're not talking about schoolyard bullies here, the next step is to call the cops so long as there's no friends coming to help the guy you just disabled. If it is a school yard bully, running at that point is just silly. Just walk off confidently).

At the point where he's disabled, it's over. There's no more fight. You're clearly plenty good as a fighter and have no trouble, unless you're injured from the fight... in which case running is unlikely to be possible, and you should still probably either walk off without showing the injury to the best of your ability, or call the cops, depending on situation.

JaronK

Not necessarily. You might have just been lucky, made good use of surprise, or simply have good defensive skills, which isn't the same thing as fighting. There's a totally different skillset required in a MMA ring than there is in a self-defense situation.

Either way, you've disabled your opponent. Frankly, I'm not nearly as worried about what you need to do at that point. The fight's over... he's disabled. Now you have to call the police (if it was a mugging or similar), walk away (if it was a bullying/dominance thing), or whatever.

However, if you're not a very good fighter, you can't exactly pull your punches before the part where he's disabled, now can you? As you say, you might be making good use of luck or surprise... both of which will run out quickly. You have to make it count, and do so now, before a potentially stronger opponent recovers and does whatever it was your attacker planned to do in the first place. And if you've got him to "disabled" then you've certainly already made it count.

JaronK

There's disabled, and there's disabled. There's an ongoing argument as to rather you should leave once he's not going to harm you, or if you should finish him to component atoms. Personally, I say go for the minimum force, while taking into account the force he used on me (E.g., lethal force gets heavier responses).

And at any event, it's not over. Standing there and calling the cops is STUPID. Run away, and call the cops from a safe distance, if you want to bother calling them at all. Run and grab a teacher, if you're in a schoolyard. Don't stick around the scene, go get help.

I guess you and I have different definitions of "disabled." Mine is "unable to do anything." From the root components "dis" and "able."

And no, standing nearby and calling the cops is not STUPID if he is disabled. Move to where you're more visible to other passers by, and make sure he's actually disabled, but keeping a visual on the person is generally wise... turning and running often isn't. Obviously, that's situation dependent.

But before, you were saying it's never okay to fight, you should always run run run, even if you have to leave your children behind, even if it's just a bully. So now we've got it to "disable him, then run away?" Great, with any luck we'll get you to something totally reasonable, like "disable him if you have to, call the cops, wait for them to show up from a safe distance preferably where other people can see you, give an appropriate report, go home, have a healthy snack, take a nap, then run away."

And no, hitting a bully, running, and getting a teacher is just asking for it. God, that's damn foolish. I know... because I did it in that one fight I've mentioned. I mean, I walked away, and then got suspended (many schools have a no tolerance policy, so if you're involved in any way, even if you're not the aggressor, you get suspended). Not to mention the fact that you just beat the guy. There's no need to run... especially with bullies it's over at this point. You've won! Walk away, it's over!

Looking, running is at times a valid option, but it's by no means the best option in all situations. I notice you've refused to answer in the scenario (real life!) that I gave earlier why running would have been better with that Neo Nazi group. Throwing out all data that counters your assertion is hardly reasonable.

JaronK

What happens if he's got a gun? You're standing in the open at close range. No, you want to be a safe distance away with cover between you.

And disabled can mean many things. "Unable to chase" is a good definition, for our purposes.


Have you even been reading my posts?!?

Disabling him has always fallen under Rule #2.


I've actually responded to your silly story several times, but I'll do it one more time. Neo-Nazi's aren't bullies, they're bottom-feeders. If your sister had faced a credible threat, such as a bunch of second-graders, she would have started a rock-throwing war that could have left her in the hospital. Come back when you have a story with a threatening opponent, such as a kidnegardner with a whiffleball bat.

If he's got a gun and able to fire it, he's not very disabled, now is he?

See, you keep changing the situation and moving goalposts all over the place.



See what I mean? You've turned "disabled" into "unable to chase but armed with a gun." Why? What makes you think anyone here would think that's what disabled means? And heck, if he's unable to chase but armed with a gun, and you just made him that way, then you're very close. Running gives him an easy shot at you, whereas continuing to attack him until you can take his gun (you after all were able to take him down, I'd guess you're now able to get that gun) leaves you much safer. Then you can withdraw from your now actually disabled opponent, and you've got his gun... so NOW you call the police (and make damn sure they know you have this guy's gun and will surrender it immediately when they arrive).



Yes, you say that anyone who does not think running is always the best idea is spouting macho BS.



First of all, she's not my sister. She's my friend. Second, people who throw rocks at students are bullies, but thanks for shifting goalposts again. Third, you have no idea that a rock throwing war would have been started had it been someone else. And yet even still, you haven't been able to say why running would have been better.

But at this point you've shot down the story because a group of neo nazis throwing rocks is evidently not a credible threat. How interesting. Shifting those goalposts even harder, are we? Okay, so running is always the best policy, so long as the threat to you is a more credible threat than a group of neo nazis. Great. Your position makes more sense now, since it would truly be macho BS to take on the hordes you evidently are talking about. Personally, I was thinking, you know, a bully. Or a mugger. Or an abusive spouse. Or someone having a psychotic break. Or something else where fighting back might be a possibility that someone would consider.

But I do agree that if it's something even bigger than hordes of rock throwing neo nazis, you should run.

JaronK

Maybe not stupid, but it still may be smarter to leave the scene before (anonymously) calling the police/ambulance/coroner to pick him up--simply because courts often view the guy who wins a fight as the attacker.

Honestly, self defense laws are pretty screwed up, and aren't always adhered to anyway. It's unfortunate that modern self defense must also incorporate legal defense to avoid being kidnapped by the police.

Are you a doctor? Can you instantly tell the difference between "Temporarily unable to move" and "Unconscious for several hours"? No? Then you're smartest move is to get away.


Not a good bet. If you have a chance to reach cover before he can draw, you're better off going for cover. Gun disamrs are tricky and dangerous things, and you only get one chance at it.

You clearly haven't been reading my posts. I'll let you review, then apologize.

Isn't that exactly what your sister/friend/whomever it is this week did? Does that make her the bully?

I'm going to break out my macho BS and say I've faced all of those situations. Looking back, running would have been the smartest answer, when it wasn't already my choice. I take it you haven't faced any of these situations? It's pretty obvious. Even when I fought and won, I lost. Running was the solution to the best victory.

Clearly you're not reading at all Cain, but at this point I don't think anyone is falling for your nonsense, and you're not willing to even think (come on, did you just say I've clearly never fought a bully, after the number of times I mentioned dealing with the one bully I've had to deal with face to face? Really?). So, let's just drop it... there's no point. Run away.

JaronK

Most self-defense experts in the US actually tell you to stay at the scene and wait for responders so you can tell your side of the story and get it straight. They also say that you should keep a cell phone on yourself at all times if you carry so your call and reporting of the incident can start the initial response and subsequent investigation in the direction you want.
Running away just makes you look like you did something wrong and do you really want the first statements about the incident to be a mugger telling the cops about how he was just minding his own business when your psychotic self went and kicked his ass completely out of the blue?

I think not...

Staying on scene, especially if he's got buddies, is worse. You want to get a safe distance away, then call for help.


Come on, how many times have I posted the rules of self-defense? And everything recently has been leaning in that direction?

IIRC You've never had to actually fight a bully, you scared one off. Which is fortunate, but not something you can rely on. People here have, and they give different advice.

I've long been of the opinion that your best bet (after disabling an attacker, however it is you managed to do so) is to (a) call as soon as possible from a safe place. Check your six and make sure he didn't have a buddy. Get to a well lit area before you fumble with your cell phone. Get the hell out of that alley and into a busy street. Get to a gas station or something, do whatever you have to do to create distance if you need it to be safe. (b) Be the first one to tell the cops what happened. Don't try to anonymously call and assume they'll never track the ballistics/find fingerprints/whatever. Call and tell the authorities what happened, when and where and how it happened, explain to them why it took you a few minutes to call them (you were going somewhere safe), and for fuck's sake if/when they show up do what they say. Drop it (don't worry about the finish), put your hands up, don't reach for your wallet, shut up and let things get under control before you say anything. Cops rolling up to the scene of a recent shooting aren't going to engage you in a tense staredown, if your hopped-up-on-adrenaline-ass points a weapon at them they'll make your bad day a whole lot worse. It happens to undercover cops all the time, it can sure as hell happen to you.

Sorry, but I tend to post like people aren't completely retarded whenever possible. Yes, I'm disappointed on a regular basis, but the idea of checking your six for other threats and moving to a safe location if it's necessary was assumed on my part.

And we all know that Assumption is the mother of Clusterfuck...

I call BS on this one. This thread has been retarded (on both sides of the argument) for at least 5 pages.

[edit] Wounded Ronin: I read your thread about alternate striking/grappling rules and thought they were interesting. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the expanded unarmed combat rules in CC (SR3) or RC (SR4). These might be a workable alternative, but I'm not really sure if they're necessary. How often would a runner get in a situation where it's mathematically advantageous to throw dice into a positioning test so that he has advantages next turn instead of just throwing dice into a damage attack that ends the fight (or at least injures the opposition) this turn? Also, how would you adapt these SR3 rules (which modify TNs) to SR4? Modify threshold instead?

Uhh, okay. I'm not really arguing with anyone, I was just sharing my own take on what I've heard/decided/thought to do after a self defense shooting.

To answer your question, it would depend on the campaign setting and flavor. It would be pretty retarded to flop down in guard while we're rolling dice for platoons operating mortars with some patrol boat firing a cannon coming to support them, but it could work in a dark moody campaign that takes place in seedy bars and has a lot of downtrodden, desperate NPCs.

I am not sure how you would convert the rules to SR4 because I'm actually not really familiar at all with the SR4 rules.

Thanks for reading my old thread, though. I'm glad that it gave you something to think about.