Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    Having for several years "played the assailant" in such a course, and
    gotten a lot of bruises for my efforts [:-)] I would say that I agree
    with mostly all of it.
    
    However one word of caution: several thousand years of collected wisdom
    in unarmed combat seems to suggest the following maxim:
    
    	"If you stop to consider the alternatives -- you lose"
    
    or put another way
    
    	"She who hesitates is lost"
    
    /. Ian .\

� Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

  I have heard it expressed as "a good lawyer can get you out of anything
  but your grave"
  
� My personal belief is that if anyone ever puts a hand on someone else without
� permission, they should lose the hand.
                 
  seconded - preferably from the shoulder.
  
  /. Ian .\

    As I used to tell my soldiers in Vietnam:
    
    "I am prepared to justify anyone's death but my own."
    
    Dirk
    

    Recommended reading :
    "The Truth About Self-Protection"
    by Massad Ayoob (paperback)

>	re: 218.5  
>	 Is Massad Ayoob also the author of "In the gravest extreme?" 
>	That is about firearms and the law and is very enlightening.

Yes, same person. "In the gravest extreme" is written for the person
who wants to use a hand gun for personal defense. Even if you
are not going to, or even if you are against weapons in general, it
is interesting reading and gives one much to think about.
He has written a good many books.

    The subject matter of ITGE is covered in "The truth About
    Self protection". The new book covers a wider range of
    topics, from burglar alarms and dogs through self-defense
    (both armed and unarmed) as well as the legal ramifications
    of all these. 
    Ayoob is a police sargeant in New Hampshire, as well as a
    top authority on defensive pistolcraft. He adresses the
    B-S recomendations of many "experts" in great detail (the
    hat-pin, umbrella, car-keys school of defense).
    The book treats self protection as a system of layered
    precautions, not a single miracle cure. 

            
CADSE::ECHEN                                         17 lines  16-DEC-1987 17:11
                       -< Guns, Knives, Baseball Bats? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    
    After following this notesfile, it sounded like a lot of women carried
    some kind of weapon (baseball bats or knives or guns) to protect
    themselves.  Or at least to feel protected.
    
    I've toyed with the idea of keeping something close at hand, but
    the thought that if the intruder should get it out of my hand, then
    I'm definitely in trouble.  I'm pretty small physically, so that
    really isn't hard to do.
    
    I guess I'd like to know if others have thought about the above
    possibility.  Also, are guns legal in Massachusetts?  How about
    those electric shockers that some women keep in their pocketbooks?
    
    -ex-self-defense-student
    
    

Many people who need some sort of protection in their lives and in
their homes simply have no idea where to start. This may seem strange
in a society where TV presents countless examples of violence. But 
there are so many myths, so many "everybody knows that" about guns,
dogs, etc. that it is hard to sort through the macho BS and outright
lies about self defense. What is needed is a systematic presentation
of self defense that starts at the beginning, and doesn't take for
granted that everyone is an expert by virtue of watching a few
westerns, cop shows, and kung-fu movies. The author of this book has
done so. 

"THE TRUTH ABOUT SELF PROTECTION" by Massad Ayoob

From the cover :"In 'The Truth About Self Protection', Massad
Ayoob provides fully illustrated, lifesaving techniques against
crime to keep you, your family and your belongings safe and 
secure. He gives specific recommendations on quality, cost and
effectiveness of every type of self-protection device sold today-
an up-to-date, state-of-the-art consumer guide to maintaining
personal safety in our violent times.
.What lethal weapons are legal to carry-the Kubotan and Mo-Gem
.What to do if you are kidnapped or taken hostage
.Attack dogs- and what to do if you are attacked by one
.When it's time to learn the martial arts
.Real protection against pickpockets and purse snatchers
.The truth about streetfighting
.The neck-twist takedown, eye attacks, and the sleeper hold
.Tips on tear gas sprays
.Locks, alarms and safes- the best for your house,your car
.Surprising self-defense devices- telephones, flashlights,makeshift
  weapons
.Special advice for the elderly and disabled
  Plus... all about guns
Should you have a gun ? The shotgun and rifles for self-defense. Why
a handgun ? Selecting a handgun. Effective combat firing techniques.
Keeping firearms safely. And the physical, emotional and legal 
ramifications if you decide to use countervailing force."

The author has written extensively on all aspects of self defense. He
is a police training officer, has spent years studying crime and
measures against it, and has discarded many myths about self defense.
He is to my knowledge the only 'gun writer' to publicly call the
'Dirty Harry' movies stupid for the inane way they portray firearms
use. He is an expert shooter, and has written training manuals for
police and civilians on firearms and other weapons. His school in
New Hampshire, Lethal Force Institute, teaches safe use of firearms
to numerous civilians. He does *NOT* recommend a gun for everybody.
He is not of the "learn to use this and you"ll be perfectly safe" 
school of firearms use. Nor does he simply recommend "get a Doberman"
or "study kung-fu". Self defense is a combination of techniques
starting with passive systems such as burglar alarms and good locks,
and escalating to techniques which may cause death or crippling 
injury to an opponent.

From the introduction : "Neither I nor Bantam Books takes the position
that citizens should violently fight back against criminal depradation.
That should be the individual's decision, the individual's option. 
However, you dont have that option until you know how to resist with
maximum force and maximum safety to yourself."

    .10 was not posted in re.9 . It is legal to carry a gun in Mass.
    after obtaining the necessary license. See your local police to
    get details. Dana

	I think this deserves more attention from women then it was
    getting in the conference I found it it. (The author of that note
    gave me permission to copy it here.)
    
    			Alfred
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This letter appeared in the Feb. 24, 1988 San Jose Mercury News, on the
Letters page.  Accompaning the letter is a drawing of a beaten and
bleeding woman backed into a corner; A revolver is shown suspended in the
air in front of her -- appearently pointed at her attacker (drawing by
Gary Viskupic -- Newsday).

Background:  Laura Black had been harrassed for years by Richard Wade
Farley. She moved several times.  He was fired from ESL in Sunnyvale ~two
years ago for harrassing Black.  The day that a restraining order was to
be filed against him, he *allegedly* shot his way into ESL, killed SEVEN
people, wonded more -- including Miss. Black.

		[ without permission ]

	Fighting back is victim's best defense


Last week's shootings at the ESL plant in Sunnyvale will undoubtedly bring
the usual clamor for harsher laws against the possession of firearms.
Dispite the fact that Richard Wade Farley allegedly killed his victims
with a shotgun, this new spat of anti-gun invective will probably focus as
usual on the handgun.

Ignoring the testimony of numerous criminologists who will maintain that
gun control laws will not keep firearms out of the hands of men described
as "aggressive, violent," and utterly determined to get their way, handgun
critics will call for another statewide gun control initive like that
rejected by voters in 1982.  But the concerned citizen who finds such
retoric appealing should stop for a moment to consider what would have
happened if the object of Farley's violent attentions had been armed.

Laura Black's situation is not unique.  Millions of women live in fear of
being victimized by male suitors, ex-lovers and strangers.  Police do not
have the resources to provide bodyguards, and it is physically inpossible
for them to be there immediately when a woman's life is threatened.  As
Sue Martin, planning director for San Francisco's Family Violence Project
told reporters after the tragety, "If someone wants to kill you, a
restraining order is just a piece of paper."  Women harassed for years as
Black was have two alternatives: resign themselves to being victimized or
carry a gun.

Anti-gun activists clame to be motivated by compassion, but surely the
most compassionate advice one could give a woman facing Black's
predicament is "buy a gun."

When are people going to learn that the best guarantee against
victimization is the potential victim's willingness to fight back?


	- Cheri Montagu
	  San Francisco

    Recently, a woman was sexually assaulted in a dormitory at a college
    near where I live.  The campus is overhauling its dormitory security,
    providing escorts home, etc...but I was wondering...is there any
    program that goes to colleges (and/or high schools) that could teach
    women what to do in a situation like that, and what NOT to do?
    
    any info welcome...
    
    -Jody
    

For what it's worth, The Manchester (NH) Police Dept and The Manchester
Union are sponsoring a self-defense program for women in the spring
some time. They ran the program a few months ago and had such a response
that they're going to do it again. I don't know the exact dates but I'm 
planning to go to the next one when I find out when it is. The way I
understand it, the program is divided up in 3 parts. There's a lecture,
a session on self-defense techniques, and an (optional) session on the
use of firearms.

Jenna

    Unfortunately, federal law absolutely forbids carrying firearms
    on a college campus, except by police whose presence has been 
    requested by campus officials. Dorm dwellers may not arm themselves.
    

        A couple of days  ago,  I saw an advert on TV for a 'stun gun'.
        The  ad  was  specifically  for   women  and  included  several
        demonstrations of the device, including it's  use by the police
        (over 40 forces claimed), and by two  women  being  attacked by
        volunteers.   The device appears to work successfully,  as  one
        guy who was zapped through a heavy leather jacket just couldn't
        get up off the floor after a touch at stomach level!
        
        The device is sold as being completely legal throughout the U.S
        and is money-back guaranteed.  It's about  the  size  of  a  TV
        remote  control  (about  6"x3")  and easily purse/pocket sized.
        Cost  is  $79.95  +  $5.00 s+h.  which includes  a  heavy  duty
        rechargeable  battery pack, charger and the gun - order details
        follow:-

                
                              NOVA XR 5000 Stun Gun
        
                                  PO BOX 2503,
        
                                    MISSION,
        
                                  KANSAS 66201.
        
        or call:  1-800-334-6900 to order.

    
    	RE: .16
    
    	While the stun gun may be legal, using it could end you in
    	alot of trouble. Say the person you used it on had a bad
    	heart and died of an heart attack. You'd end up with charges
    	being brought against you. You can own a knife, no problem,
    	but it's use is another matter.

        Re: .17,
        
        I accept that, George, but in a life-threatening situation, I'd
        sooner my wife was able to take some kind of action rather than
        having no choice.   Self  defence  is legal against main force,
        and should an assailant die  in  the  process  of  an attack, I
        don't think there's a court in  the  land  that  would convict.
        (I'm probably wrong on the last point, but I'd sooner the woman
        was alive rather than the rapist!)
        
        Regards,
        
        Andy.
        

    
    However it should be pointed out that a weapon you carry may be
    used against you.  I plan to attend the model mugging class where
    I hope to learn to defend myself.  I personally would rather depend
    on my own strength to get me out of trouble than my ability to
    fumble for and then properly operate some "gizmo"...
                                                     
    Justine

    I shudder to think that the potential rapist can procure and use
    a stun gun against his victim...

    
    	Also worth noting is the premise of having the device on
    	your person. Simply stated it means if you use deadly force
    	to protect yourself during an attack is one thing, but being
    	armed before hand makes it another matter. I would think a
    	course in self-defense such as mentioned in .19 would be
    	a much wiser choice over any type of weapon.

    a) if your opponent is close enough to use the stun gun against
       him, he's too close to be drawing a weapon.
    
    b) if he's not that close, he will see the weapon and may
       attempt to disarm you. In this case, you can't stop him from
       closing the distance between you. (And many criminals are
       expert at disarming victims. They practice such techniques
       in jails.)

    For these reasons, a combination of unarmed and remote defenses
    is superior to the stun gun.

    Dana

�< Note 218.16 by ENGINE::FRASER "Oh no, Salom�; not in the fridge!" >

 "legal" is a strange word - it means different things to different people!

 In the case of stun guns it means to the seller that no state has yet made
 them absolutely illegal. However I believe I am right in saying that in
 Massachusetts stun guns, along with Mace and tear gas cans, require the same
 licencing as a firearm to be carried concealed in public places. A law banning
 them outright in New Hampshire failed to get through the state legislature
 only because it was poorly framed, and it is expected to be resubmitted at a
 future date.

 They are not "non-lethal" - there are well documented cases of people with
 coronary conditions dying after being zapped.

 The Nova is also a rather low powered device (which may permit its sale in a
 few places that might ban more powerful weapons) and I would be very dubious
 about its ability to stop somebody hyped up on PCP for example.

 I own (purely out of collector's interest) a South African manufactured riot
 control baton that looks for all the world like a rolled collapsible gent's
 umbrella with a silk cover on it. You carry it hanging from your wrist on its
 lanyard, and the power cord runs up your sleeve to a separate power pack
 designed to be worn on your belt. This thing will stop anybody!!! (It runs
 power at something like 80kv [by comparison the '5000' in the title of the
 Nova refers to the fact that it's operational delivery is approximately 5kv]
 and substantial current load - the South African police admit that it is often
 fatal when used against rioters) - to buy the thing in Britain I needed to add
 it to my Firearm Certificate under the same general heading as a machine gun
 or hand grenade.

       /. Ian .\

        Re: .last few,
        
        Don't shoot the messenger! :*)
        
        I'm not  connected  with  this  company  in any way and I'm not
        advocating that every  woman  should have one.  The information
        was presented as a source for this device in the same spirit as
        if I had seen advertised a self-defence course specifically for
        women - ie.  here is  some  information that might be useful to
        someone, use it if you wish.
        
        Andy.
        

       I meant nothing personal by my remarks - apologies if it were
       taken that way. I consider these things *very* dangerous,
       regardless of the legalities.

       I saw a 30 minute commercial for these things a few weeks back
       (it was run at 3 in the morning on one of the cable channels - I
       am an insomniac :-) and remember thinking that I should find
       somebody to complain to about this sort of dangerous programming
       (the tone made it appear that the program was a documentary on a
       new and viable defensive tool, rather than what it was - a fully
       paid for commercial for the Nova 5000). At one time such programs
       were banned under FCC regulations, and I for one regret that the
       rule was ever rescinded.

       Incidentally a lot of the places that sell combat knives, camping
       gear et al that advertise in the likes of "Soldier of Fortune"
       magazine carry these, and more powerful, stun "guns" (a few even
       sell Tazers - the Tazer is the same idea but looks like a gun -
       it fires a dart attached to a length of wire - once you have your
       assailant hooked up on the dart you pull the voltage trigger and
       zap him...)

       /. Ian .\

    about stun guns - I read somewhere (or perhaps heard it on the news)
    that they were re-wording a law somewhere in Great Britain to state it
    is illegal to "carry a gun which emits or discharges a dangerous...",
    rather than just plain "carry a gun", because thieves were stunning
    their victims with the stun gun and then relieving them of their
    personal belongings while they were helpless.
    
    -Jody
     
    

       I haven't seen that, but am not surprised if it is true...
       British law has for over a century differentiated between crimes
       in which the criminal does not carry a firearm and those in which
       [s]he does. However Stun Guns were invented somewhat after the
       law was written. Low powered ones are considered undesirable
       curiosities that can get you charged with carrying a dangerous
       weapon (but then carrying a pen knife can do that). High powered
       stun devices are classified as "Class III weapons" ie not
       availably legally to anybody without a suitable Home Office
       issued licence (not even the local cops can issue these licences
       - they are the equivalent of the BATF licences issued by the
       Federal Authorities in America for possesion of machine guns)

       /. Ian .\