Koscheck and Johnson Stopped By Basic Self Defense Moves

So as I watched UFC 106 the other night it was interesting to see the Koscheck/Johnson fight repeatedly stopped by the referee for “illegal” strikes on at least 3 occasions during the match. Now I absolutely agree that in a combat sport match the rules need to be adhered to so the fighters are allowed to pit their athleticism and skill in a controlled setting to see who can win.

Here is an excerpt from a report on the fight: read this entry »

Looks like the UK press is still wrestling with the idea that in a life or death criminal assault effective self defense may mean you need to injure the assailant. I was interviewed for this article last month from arguably the worlds most prestigious newspaper, The Times of London.

The reporter was a very nice guy and seemed interested in the subject but uncomfortable with what it takes to survive in an extreme asocial criminal assault. Again the writer focused on the injuries an innocent person would put on the criminal that initiated the unprovoked potentially lethal attack.

There seems to be a disconnect about the fact the assailant attacked the innocent person with intent to do grievous bodily harm (GBH). But maybe I’m biased…

Read the article and let me know your thoughts on the subject. Is it extreme self defense or murder OR maybe just effective self protection?