RPBrown wrote:Now, size, although a portion of the problem, is not the only issue. I am 6'4 and 260ish but have a bad back, bad knees, and generally old and out of shape. With that I may be justified in more cases than you would be.
Exactly. In the last dojo I studied in, there was a little Puerto Rican dude with an 8th Dan who was the size of a flea. I once watched him completely manhandle a 6'4" 240 lb 5th Dan in a sparring match.MoJo wrote:If someone is angry enough to attack you then, they are a threat to your life. One punch landed to the right place can kill regardless how big, strong, young or old the person is. Fists are deadly weapons. I've seen several big guys being whipped by somebody half their size. We are all responsible for our own salvation.
Disparity of force arguments might mean something and be easily definable when you're talking about a 92 lb granny versus a 240 lb aggressor; but in most situations your disparity of force is much harder to prove, and I don't believe that you need to absorb any more abuse than a smaller person before defending yourself. You don't know if that smaller person has a knife until he gets in close enough that your pistol is next to useless, for instance, in which your larger size is no longer really an advantage.
If someone attempts to get physical with me, my gun is coming out. I don't care how big or small they are. Now, in my case, I have some significant disability that balances the disparity of force in favor of the other guy, even if he's smaller than my 5' 10", mumble-ten lb frame. But he has no way of knowing that when he starts his aggression. The way I see it, if a smaller person assaults a larger person, the smaller person is pretty confident that they have the upper hand—so perceived disparity of force is irrelevant unless it is a really stark difference such as the aforementioned granny versus a thug.