TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:

JALLEN wrote:Apprehension is not necessarily limited to fear or anxiety about a bad or unpleasant event, but can include understanding or awareness of a fact or situation or circumstance. I think that is most likely the sense the Lege intended, to make someone aware that deadly force was about to be used if they didn't change their ways.

You don't believe that the possibility of the use of deadly force against someone would be cause of fear or anxiety? Or you don't believe that the use of deadly force would be an unpleasant event? Actually, if it wasn't cause for concern, why would the other person be convinced to change their ways?

My only point was that the definition of apprehension as being an arrest was not appropriate. PC9.04 is not talking about a citizen arrest. It is specifically talking about the threat of the use of deadly force. Said threat to convince the other person deadly force will be used if necessary. Whether that information is intended to create fear or anxiety, or merely to inform, is pretty much irrelevant. (IMO)

None of the above. I merely point out that the definition of "apprehension" includes all of the concepts mentioned, and whether fear, anxiety, unpleasantness is generated, the key to it is awareness. It was all you said and more besides.

Apprehension is not necessarily limited to fear or anxiety about a bad or unpleasant event, but can include understanding or awareness of a fact or situation or circumstance. I think that is most likely the sense the Lege intended, to make someone aware that deadly force was about to be used if they didn't change their ways.

cz75texas wrote: As a 22 yr old man I'm still at the age where there's still alot of knuckleheads who would confront me just because I accidentally cut them off or glanced in their direction....(South Texas for ya). For some reason the younger you are the more people think you're trying to fight them or disrespect them. I'm not going to go off and engage a guy who is just trying to be mr. macho. I personally NEED to develop a plan of action so to speak. Know how to match the aggressor properly and handle the situation with intelligence.

If I were 22 yo and in reasonably good health, I would take up aikido. Of course, if I were 22 yo and in good health, I'd sign up in the military and let THEM teach me this stuff, on the payroll.

Maybe some other martial art form, but when I looked into it at some length, aikido is what appealed to me. This is what Stephen Segal practices. When I looked into it the appeal is that the moves are very fluid, not aggressive in appearance, the reason I said earlier that, to a witness, it would look like some man was attacking you, slipped or stumbled and ended up in the ground in agony with broken arm. You never actually struck him or anything. The visits I made to the dojos here more or less confirmed this impression I had gotten from online sites, but also I learned that it takes sometimes years to develop the skills and reflexes and moves to be able to do this reliably. I don't want to be real good in ten years. It is not a choice for us older folk or the infirm, etc.

I was impressed very much taking the Level 1 course in Krav Maga. If you look into this, try to find a course taught at a Jewish Community Center, as there are a number of outfits selling courses, "McDojo's" to detractors, that are more interested in cash flow than instruction, if you get my drift. The JCC sponsored offerings seem to be more likely the "real deal." Krav Maga has number of advantages, in that it is straight forward, effective, has none of the quasi-religious "Asian pajama dancing" aspects to it some criticize.

So many variables!

What is your age, physical state, size?

Often times, announcing (in an aggressive manner) to the would be thug to leave you alone or you call the cops is enough. If it isn't, it seems like you've established a threat of bodily harm.

Some young folks can train in some martial art that might be a good non-lethal avenue of handling a minor threat. I envy them, especially the ones who have perfected the moves in aikido, where it looks like the guy is attacking you, then stumbles and falls on the ground with a broken arm, screaming in agony and nobody saw you lay a hand on him!

Many of us who are more mature types no longer have that option, either the time to learn or train for that sort of thing, or the physical prowess to pull it off even if we knew how. I can't even run anymore! I would have to walk rapidly, pulling my oxygen concentrator behind me at a vigorous clip. Give me a 30 minute head start, I might disappear! Are stun guns, those 9 million volt jobs, worth having?

My wife is a 3rd dan black belt in tang soo do, the Korean martial art. I guess if the assailant is unarmed she can whack him around; if he is armed, I'll shoot him! If it comes to serious defense, the gun will have to do, either by persuasion or by shooting it.

I'll be interested in learning what other ideas come out of this discussion.