Please or Register to create posts and topics.

YouTube channels to learn from

12
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on February 23, 2021, 3:49 am

LEARNING TO HANDLE PHYSICAL THREATS

In the past, I used to follow a Facebook channel, then a YouTube channel called "Real Violence for Knowledge".

I liked it a lot, but it slowed down with the content.

Then I discovered a much bigger and more famous channel called "Active Self-Protection".

The guy has tons of videos and I subscribed.

He's great at marketing and his vids are a mix of edgy type of entertainment, educational, and various paid promotions.
I learned a lot from him, but I also recognized some mistakes here and there.
Sometimes he misses opportunities for using collaborative frames in de-escalation, and I don't think he's Machiavellian enough when it comes to the use of force.

I used to watch his videos daily and I now catch up every week to watch all his videos.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood
Quote from John Freeman on February 23, 2021, 8:56 am

I used to watch his videos daily and I now catch up every week to watch all his videos.

Power dynamics and self-defense at 360° :).

What do you think of his videos/commentary?

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I think that he's:

  1. Religious: when he talks about Jesus/Christ or spiritual fitness. I don't mind as he's not being aggressive with it.
  2. Using reality-based thinking: from the cases, he's using his reason, psychology and laws of physics to find solutions.
  3. Considering the whole spectrum of self-defense: from fleeing to de-escalation, to self-defense unarmed or armed.
  4. Using case-based learning: this goes hand-in-hand with reality-based thinking. It shows how many situations actually fall within a small number of different cases
  5. Showing principles: he shows when they work and when they don't.
  6. Using a recurrent vocabulary: he has a whole terminology that he uses. Some he created, some already existed. Just like TPM, this allows creation of mental models based on concepts
  7. Created method like 5ds + 1

So actually mostly good things.

I don't actually understand your commentaries, do you have specific examples?

Thank you for sharing John.

Yeah, I have some and I had started writing examples when first Matthew asked, but then erased as that would be too long and off-topic.

But there was one instance where there was a homeless guy from the neighborhood showing up at a store.

He said that using the pepper spray against the homeless without warning was the best solution.

I disagreed because the guy was from the neighborhood, so trying a more win-win solution first was better (neighborhood people are the worst people to get to blows with).

Second, pepper spray without warning can be seen as a "bitch move" from a street guy. That's OK in random situations. But in situations where the guy knows where to find and has nothing to lose while you must keep the shop and have a lot to lose, it's a big risk (ie.: the homeless might come back with a gun).
The rule is always the same: wounding but not killing is a risky choice when you got a lot to lose, the original attacker has nothing to lose, and knows where you live/work.

Third, the best Machiavellian solution, the final one, was not to pepper spray. It was to induce the homeless to actually attack -say, nasty verbal exchange to get under his skin- and then either defend yourself with deadly force (a gun), or have a friend defend you with deadly force (in many US states, once you're under physical attack, it's often legal to defend yourself by shooting).

Those are higher level strategic thinking, and he had missed them all.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Alright I understand your point. In this specific case, I have to see the video to understand the situation because the third solution is a bit shocking to me if the guy is just being homeless. Like what? So I think I would need the video. I got the general idea, though.

 

That's the video:

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Ok. You still scare me a little bit wanting to kill this guy, though. First the animals, now this guy. What are you angry about?

OFF-TOPIC

Maybe we have a different view of life.

To me, it's not an indissoluble right to stay alive.

If one is an asshole and repeatedly assaults, harms, or threatens other's people's lives and livelihood as if it were dirt, then the world is better off going on without him.
He's already proven he's not here to do anything good for the world.

In some cases, it's a very worthy goal and accomplishment to kill someone.

Think for example of the generals that tried to kill Hitler, how many lives that would have saved if they had succeeded -and what a poorly executed attempt that was :S-.

Plus, there are plenty of situations in which it's about "your life, or someone else's life".
Then, it's no different than competing for a promotion, or for a leadership spot.

And in those cases, if that "someone else's life" is a bandit's life, I'll always be on the side of the "good" guy, and against the bandit.

OFF-TOPIC

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
12