Why Learning Effective Methods For
Using Violence Is More Important Than Trying
To Navigate Self-Defense Liability

******************************************************

"DEFENSIVE POLICY of the US - does not alter PACIFIC POLICY of
the US. Be as pacific as you please but don't let the other guy
catch you unprepared."

- Lt. General Bullard, 1911

******************************************************

I've received some great questions from you folks! So I thought I'd pick
2 that are representative of many of the emails we see here at
the office. Look to the end of this letter to see how to DIRECTLY
contact me with your questions. Look forward to hearing from you.

OK here's the first one:

Brian from Alaska writes:

Mr. Larkin:
In reference to the person questioning your program's use of
learning anatomical targets, all I can say is that there are way
too many "armchair experts". As a Critical Care Registered Nurse
with dan ranking in 6 styles, I think I am qualified to say that
many people have absolutely NO IDEA what the implications of
striking certain targets are. To simply say "hit them here and
they will fall down" is absurd! I have knocked out a fellow
Hapkidoist by striking his radial nerve hard with a palm strike.
Causing a vagal reaction such as that has also happened when I
have held pressure against the femoral artery both while sparring
and in my role as a nurse to stop bleeding. So called "experts"
practice and teach techniques that they do not understand fully
in respect to the ramifications.

I believe in your system and to anyone who questions the validity
of it I say...meet me on the mat!

My Answer:

Thanks Brian! Many people have written in regarding the TFT
Mastery Program and its curriculum. The fact that we have our
Mastery students study anatomy texts and relevant medical trauma
texts has been applauded by many, like you, who have to use this
knowledge to protect themselves on a daily basis.

Accurately targeting the 73 anatomically weak areas of the human
body is THE gold standard of creating objective injuries on any
human - regardless of the size and physical strength of the
person targeted.

An ominous validation of this approach was recently written about
in a major magazine. It seems a well-known and incredibly violent
prison gang was requiring its 'members' to study human anatomy to
better target their selected victims. To paraphrase the leader of
this prison gang 'when you only get 3 stabs with a sharpened
toothbrush before the guards break it up you need to make every
stab count!' Pretty brutal stuff but then... effective violence
is not a politically correct subject.

Richard M. writes:

Dear Mr. Larkin et al.;

I got your tape (just the basic one) and "workbook" recently and
must say I was impressed with the ideas, and consider myself
better off for having read/viewed them.

Having said this, and believing it would be true for almost
everyone else who might view them, I hope you might go into more
depth re. what would likely be a lethal situation and what would
not. Below you mention a male on female attack scenario, yet -
while I am no expert - I have heard statistics that females
fighting back - with strictly non-lethal methods, mainly talking
with confidence or screaming, or confidently pushing an attacker
away - are much more likely to get out of an attack by male
attackers than those choosing not to. Most women would be
terrified of killing another human being (as would perhaps most
men) and might avoid your type of training as such.

Perhaps some non-lethal yet disabling strikes along with a means
of threat interpretation would be more viable in such a
situation, or is it your understanding that the strong mindset
(and resulting posture/language) gained by having trained in your
methods would send the correct message that the woman is not to
be messed with, and therefore save her from attack? Maybe this is
dealt with in the other tapes?

I would honestly respectfully suggest that your scenario on your
tape of a drugged out attacker likely to kill for money (vs. a
non homicidal robber) is more of a minority situation than a
majority situation, and suspect that this determination could be
narrowed down a bit via the observation of certain signs, which,
when in effect, would more easily justify the use of your lethal
methodology (like a throat strike) in the mind of the person
being attacked, which would make your tapes perhaps more
marketable and less likely to invite legal action if interpreted
incorrectly by potential viewers. Perhaps a discussion of drugs
or serious psychosis would be a good addition? You are doing
solid work, it would be a shame if some misinterpretation or
over-jealous lawyer were to destroy it for lack of disclaimers or
more in-depth discussion.

Anyway, just some thoughts, please correct me if I'm wrong. I
would look forward to hearing from you if you were inclined to
respond.

Thanks again

My Answer:

Richard's email is typical of many I get from readers who seem to
miss the point of what TFT is designed for - ASOCIAL criminal
violence. We would all like to believe that we can probably get
away from having to use violence if we just 'resist' but do no
'harm'. The world is FULL of systems and trainers who will train
you in the above methods. There are next to NONE who will teach
you how to use violence against a determined asocial criminal
who, if not stopped, will maim, cripple, or kill you.

The liability issues are not present at the POINT OF VIOLENCE the
only thing that counts is SURVIVAL and in order to insure your
survival you must INJURE the other guy! That is the only
guaranteed way to change things in your favor where you can
determine the outcome of the situation. We clearly define the
rare occasions where violence is the appropriate response.

In fact, Target-Focus Training receives much better insurance
rates BECAUSE we clearly define this issue and the fact that TFT
gives you the full information on not only how to properly create
traumas in the human body but also clearly states the RESULTS of
those traumas on the human body. This reinforces our main message
that violence is rarely the answer in most circumstances.

As to the stats on using less than lethal or solely aggressive
verbal strategies to deal with asocial violence those fall
outside the focus of this newsletter and Target-Focus Training in
general. We are here to discuss asocial violence and how to use
violence to survive these situations. Other subjects in the
criminal justice arena or self-defense literature can better
serve people with concerns OTHER than survival.

Until next time,

Tim Larkin
Master Close-Combat Instructor,
Creator of Target-Focus(TM) Training

PS. If you didn't see my note earlier: I know many of you still
have questions about the Target-Focus Training system. To help
answer these, I recently took 12 key concepts and discussed each
in depth in 5 to 10 minute segments, then had these transcribed.
Each is available on our website. You can hear or see these now
by clicking this link: http://tinyurl.com/9z73r. Let me know what
you think.