Hand to Hand Combat.

[Horned Toad]

As for the .45 my favorate ammo is Remington Golden sabres.

Hell yeah!! Everyone else always answers 'HydroShoks' or some other shit...Golden Sabres are where it's at!!

Unless they have changed the bullet since last time I have messed with they I had a bunch that I dug out of targets that failed to expand. My all time favorite was the old Cor-bon 200 grain hollow point. I think the bullet was made by CCI. The cavity looked like you could fit a #2 pencil eraser in it. Had to have a good 1911 to feed them. Second favorite is Triton 185 grain .45 supers, leave a 5" barrel at 1390 fps.

[Rgr_MindRiot]

Good news guys....you are ALL right !.

The problem here is not about the merits of HTH rather, it is in the confusion caused by using "fight" and "combat" synonomously. They are NOT the same and anyone who confuses them in the world will either be dead or facing a jury.

Since the Military version of "combat" is pretty self-explanitory, what we are really talking about is when a "fight" turns into "combat". Or, as already mention, how to prevent getting into either in the first place ie. situtaional awareness. As for the latter, my favorite saying in those instances when idiots put themselves in harms way went something like "you know you were in the wrong fucking place at the wrong fucking time, don't you ?". That pretty much covered the strategy of not hanging out in places where people who like to do harm to other people hang out.

A "fight" is what we all think of in a traditional sense and does not include weapons, stomping, bashing, banging. Whenever an encounter goes beyond the tradional fight it is "combat" and you are fighting for your life.

If you assume that HTH can allow you to survive a "combat" situtation you might be right, but your betting your life on it. On the other hand, if you react to a fight as if it were combat then be prepared to be arrested, charged, and convicted of a FELONY crime. This could be anywhere from an Aggravated Assault charge for having a weapon to murder.

So, be smart. Stay away from places you should not be and know how to move between a "fight"and "combat" as many times as necessary to be safe and to save your family the stress of a trial.

[Tankkiller275]

First about ammo:

Every firearm will function differently with different ammo. Not just different makes or models of firearms, but different firearms of the same make. Many variables enter an equation to account for this, but the shooter plays a large part in the equation as well. A friend and I have the same make of pistol, Keltec P40's for backup - He and his firearm prefers GoldDot, and I and mine prefer Starfire ammo.

Not only do firearms differ, but the ammo functions differently as well. You might think this is a no brainer, but I don't mean just between different makers of ammo. When lots change within the same type of ammo, a prudent and responsible person would go to the range and determine how the ammo functions.

Combat/fight:

Combat and fighting are the same by definition, but can be thought of as different based on situational contexts. Militarily, as an analogy, I like to think of combat as the Arena, and fighting as the events on the field of battle. A soldier can be in combat, but not fight on that particular mission, or fight and not be in combat. As a Citizen combat and fighting are the same, unless you throw in the spats between friends that may lead to blows. Based on the topic of discussion the oponent is a person hell bent on killing/harming you. Common distance in a "street fight" or altercation is around 7 yards, or 21 feet. There is no doubt that a person highly trained in the martial, knife, and firearm arts stand the greatest chance of survival. Many of us don't have an option to choose which to use. I am partial to a firearm, and have trained to engage at varying distances and under varying scenerios. I also have varying tools at my disposal, based on the threat level I perceive at the time. Fighting means to use any means available to overcome and defeat an opponent.

I can't remember the exact statement, but the options in a fight are not just to use fists or be a felon, and I appologize to make it this simplistic. No one that I know, and I would bet the same is true for all of us here which take it upon themselves to protect themselves and the ones they love, wants to engage in an action that may take the life of another. We are not out looking for trouble, but choose to be ready knowing that if a threat does materialize and cannot be avoided by the time law enforcement arrives their job will be to pick up the pieces. I only want the pieces to be that of the poor bastard that chose the wrong time, place, and person to victumize.

Sorry for the long post.

RLTW!

[Tankkiller275]

Good news guys....you are ALL right !.

So, be smart. Stay away from places you should not be and know how to move between a "fight"and "combat" as many times as necessary to be safe and to save your family the stress of a trial.

Come on!! See, this is what I mean. No one can predict when, where, and how aggression toward oneself will occur. That is why I, and many others I know train and prepare, physically and mentally.

First of all, this is America! Where should I not be? Where is a safe place? How about a school? Tell that to the families of a male teacher found in the gym shot in the chest! Maybe had he been allowed to carry the means to defend himself he would still be alive. For him, it was neither a fight nor combat, but just plain murder. What about the Ranger beat up in a mall by a gang of bloods for wearing a red jacket? Should he not have been there?

Instead of worrying about the stress of a trial, how about train and prepare in any means available to a person to avoid the stress a family would undergo during a funeral. Truely, combat vs fighting is symmantic, and I have not heard of court case arguing the difference when deciding an altercation, but merit the facts of the case. If a threat presents itself that makes a person fear for his/her life, then that person has the right to defend him/herself with whatever means is available until the threat is stopped or no longer perceived. Even then it is not clear cut, as what I perceive as a threat of life vs another person will vary as well.

The bottom line is that not everyone who finds themselves in a situation where they have to engage in combat and fight for their lives were where they shouldn't have been.

RLTW!

[Dublo]

If you were in a world of shit which weapon would you chose:

A: Your hands.
B: Your hands and feet.
C: .45 with 6 full magazines.
D: Wrestling and Grappling.

All are invited to this poll, even Commies, Hajis, and other assorted bad guys.

Doc Cook

PRC-77 and a Plotting Board :D :D

Welshan, a mortarman to the end. Awesome.

[Rgr_MindRiot]

Good news guys....you are ALL right !.

So, be smart. Stay away from places you should not be and know how to move between a "fight"and "combat" as many times as necessary to be safe and to save your family the stress of a trial.

Come on!! See, this is what I mean. No one can predict when, where, and how aggression toward oneself will occur. That is why I, and many others I know train and prepare, physically and mentally.

Agreed, and what you are referring to is the premis of "Situtaional Awareness". Good to hear that you are keeping your skill level up, many people do not possess the skills to defend themselves or have not maintained the level once they get it.

First of all, this is America! Where should I not be? Where is a safe place? How about a school? Tell that to the families of a male teacher found in the gym shot in the chest! Maybe had he been allowed to carry the means to defend himself he would still be alive. For him, it was neither a fight nor combat, but just plain murder. What about the Ranger beat up in a mall by a gang of bloods for wearing a red jacket? Should he not have been there?

The world is a dangerous place, more so today than ever before. I think everyone on this site is old enough to know that there are places where you just should not be, they are in every town in every state. And, if you choose to go there anyway then the probability of you getting into a confrontation which you would not have been in if you had not shown poor judgement, would not have happened.

Instead of worrying about the stress of a trial, how about train and prepare in any means available to a person to avoid the stress a family would undergo during a funeral. Truely, combat vs fighting is symmantic, and I have not heard of court case arguing the difference when deciding an altercation, but merit the facts of the case. If a threat presents itself that makes a person fear for his/her life, then that person has the right to defend him/herself with whatever means is available until the threat is stopped or no longer perceived. Even then it is not clear cut, as what I perceive as a threat of life vs another person will vary as well.

Stress of a trial is avoidable by applying common sense and knowing the difference between a "fight" and "combat". If you do not know anyone who has been through a "trial" then you cannot understand. Even for those found "not guilty" the cost of the trial are extremely stressful, not just from a financial standpoint either. Agreed, everyone has the right to defend themselves or others from immenent harm. As far as what is percieved as a deadly threat, a jury may decide that for you if you make the wrong decision.

The bottom line is that not everyone who finds themselves in a situation where they have to engage in combat and fight for their lives were where they shouldn't have been.

No argument there.

RLTW!

[Ripcord]

I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6 ,Always be on alert and have your backdoor covered,no i repete no place is 100% safe

[Top]

How about an air strike? Very effective & you don't get your assigned weapon dirty! (Besides they're fun to watch. Sumthin' like Independance day fireworks). Artillery scares me after having too many close calls to injury by "friendly" fire.
Top out.

[hobbit]

If you ever get close enough for hand-to-hand in war, one side or the other is usually going to have their hands reaching for the sky.

[Bell]

An effective combatant in my opinion can easily use a long range weapon, a mid range weapon, a melee weapon and no weapon, and be proficent in all.
There are many reports of U.S. soldiers fighting and winning at bayonet range over in Iraq, when it is that close, tell me how not knowing martial arts could be a handicap?
Martial arts are more than just your hands, feet, grapples, sweeps and locks. Martial arts are an effective way of MELEE combat which has been seen extensively in Iraq as our soldiers are now tasked with being peacekeepers more than warriors.
They don't shoot to kill civilians, infact they don't shoot civilians on purpose at all unless they are acting without honor. In these situations knowing how to take a fully grown man down, hold him down, and make sure he hurts bad enough that he doesn't wanna get up without permanantly injuring him, is a VERY vital skill to have.
Not all war is at range, not all war is shooting, we now face an occupational role where melee is as common as ranged fighting. A police role where we would rather arrest, detain and learn from insurgents than shoot them only to spawn more.
I have studied martial arts and fighting systems for 2 years now, which is a short time but non-the-less, I have learned much. In those two years I have learned the value and importance that is being as Melee proficent as you are Ranged proficent. In CQB situations, martial arts/the ability to take down a person and shooting are equal tasks. A soldier in a CQB role's best weapon is his voice of all things, if he speaks with intent that he will kill the person if they act hostile, and for them to do exactly what he says are extremely important, as you can avoid a firefight all together, the best solution is to not have to pull the trigger.
The Army teaches you how to fight for a reason, as a soldier, you are highly likely to need those skills. If a man is unarmed and attacks a soldier, it is better soldiering to physicall take him down and detain him than it is to shoot him.

Awww, fuck it. I ain't gonna bother. You got a couple of things in there that rub me wrong.

Who taught you your military tactics? Some of that shit is funny.

RLTW
Bell

[Horned Toad]

An detain him.......... than it is to shoot him.

If you notice there is a large part of that post missing. I am sure you read that somewhere or some martial arts teacher told you that and you are being a good parot by repeating it, but how about you finish highschool first then get in the military then come back with an informed opion.