A Leopard 2A4 tank performs a textbook ambush on a column of Russian armoured vehicles.
Typical ambush tactics for a convoy. You kill the last vehicle first, because no one else typically has eyes on it, so everyone will be confused for a few seconds. If you kill the first one first everyone knows what is going on instantly. Killing the rear vehicle is not always feasible, however.
Next you kill the first vehicle. You now have a dead vehicle at the rear, and a dead vehicle in the front, and if the road is narrow enough, you have created a kill zone. The convoy cant reverse without going off road, and it cant advance without going off road, either.
You call in artillery immediately on this kill zone. Or, if you’ve timed your ambush right, you put command detonated explosives on the road side and fuck everyone up as they try to get out of the kill zone.
The situation was entirely preventable. These are young men seeking to prove themselves to their peers by showing bravery and demonstrating their prowess and composure in a fight. They were seeking confrontation, with one man arming themselves when they knew a physical confrontation was about to kick off.
We can minimise this kind of outcome by providing opportunity, role models, purpose and discipline to young men, and an outlet to prove themselves and achieve self-worth. Suppressing competitive behaviour in boys and denying them these opportunities is how you amplify toxic masculinity. Their energy has to be directed into productive and benign pursuits. If they aren’t provided a positive group of peers and role models, they will find their own who may be antisocial in nature.
Scissors are lethal weapons
Secondly, this demonstrates just how lethal any type of blade can be. The next time you hear about police shooting someone after they attempted to stab someone with scissors, go back and watch this video, and remember what just a pair of scissors can do.
Bans on specific types of blades are fruitless
Where I live, we have banned the following types of knives:
Flickknife
Ballistic knife
Sheath knife
Urban Skinner
Trench knife
Butterfly knife or “balisong”
Star knife
Zombie Knife
Any object made of strong material with a point can be used to stab, and any hard material with an edge can be used to cut.
Banning any type of blade only results in the use of blades which are not prohibited, especially kitchen knives. Kitchen knives are typically made of steel, have a long sharp blade and a point, with a full or partial tang, and ergonomic handle.
These attributes make kitchen knives more effective as weapons than many of the banned knives, which are mostly designed for their appearance.
Knife designs can increase reliability and practicality, but they are all lethal, including cheap scissors purchased from a late-night corner store.
Laws which prohibit the carrying of blades and other weapons in a public place have more merit and real effect on outcomes, depending on the area and cultural context.
This clip (courtesy of World Star Hip Hop, of course), illustrates several concepts I’ve covered in detail in a previous article and video, which you can find at the bottom of this post.
In the video we’re looking at today, a topless black male in blue jeans performs exceptionally well in terms of managing multiple opponents.
After knocking down his first opponent, he sees another male stepping forward and crossing the line of bystanders. He identifies this as someone who intends to intervene in the fight.
Typically, the plan of the bystander is to attack from the side while their target is focused on someone else.
Our main character immediately target switches. Target switching is a key component of fighting multiple opponents. He hasn’t completely taken the first man out of the fight, but he now has to prioritise the man who is moving forward because that is now the most serious threat.
As he approaches the second man he takes a wide angle, keeping the rest of the crowd in his peripheral vision. This avoids having the crowd behind him, completely out of sight.
At this moment, a third man approaches, but he’s on the side of our main character, and they form a line standing roughly shoulder to shoulder.
Main character sees his first opponent coming back to attempt a flank while he’s focused on the second man.
Main character correctly switches back to him, prioritising the opponent who is approaching from a dangerous angle.
This is exactly what I talked about in my multiple opponents video. An excellent demonstration of target switching.
The second man then crosses the line, which is often a big mistake because it exposes the flank, but main character was not in a position to take advantage of it.
It then becomes two individual fights which is a very common occurrence in a brawl.
While you’re dealing with your own problem however, you should try to remain aware of what the others are doing, because one of them is going to transfer over to your side when their problem is dealt with.
Which is what main character does. When he gets the chance, he transfers to the hoodie and blindsides him in exactly the same way they were attempting earlier but didn’t have the skill to pull it off.
And here you have the contrast between one man who could remain situationally aware enough to target switch, and another man who could not.
The other failure is wearing a hoodie in a fight, which can be for control in grappling.
This is why I advocate for spending at least some time grappling and sparring in a gi. People do wear jackets and other clothes that can be gripped in a fight.
Another video I’ve made which is relevant to this is about issues around bystanders, you can also find that below.
Terrible strategy on behalf of the group. All attacked from the front, terrible angles, hovered at the end of his striking range, did not close distance, did not control position.
Bystanders, brawls, and the court of public opinion
The narrative surrounding an event can often be as influential as the event itself. Public opinion and the perceptions of bystanders can significantly shape the narrative, even if they do not have full context or understanding of the situation.
This is particularly true for police, who in recent years have seen worsening results in the public discourse.
The “court of public opinion” is now increasingly magnified, where social media and online platforms can amplify and distort narratives. Our actions, especially in public situations, can have far-reaching consequences beyond the immediate confrontation; despite millions of interactions where nothing noteworthy happens, a single bad police interaction can even lead to protests and unrest in other countries.
My message here is ultimately simple – give some consideration to how you might appear to bystanders in any given situation. Facts are subservient to emotion.
