Self Defense 101: An Exploration of Self Defense Training and Its Applicability for College Flight Majors

This research explores tho feasibility of developing a self defense program for flight majors at a university. Traditional systems of martial arts are discussed and the limitations in these systems are explored. Traditional martial arts have many components found in modernized systems of self defense. The major d i i r e n c e betweon tmditional and modern systems is that traditional ways take years to perfect and may not address situations in the flight environment. Modem systems by to replicate environments where the self defense encounter would occur and attempt to teach the system in the quickest manner possible. Based on the research done by Overchuk (2008), pilots have Multiple Intelligence (MI) profiles which are different fiom other professions. Multiple intelligences are a preferred way of thinking or an ability a person uses to make sense of a situation. Because pilots have distinct MI profiles, suggestions have been m d e to change self defense training regimens to fit a pilot's MI profile. Accdmg to the T-portation Security Administration (not dated) "The Vision 100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act" requires air carriers providmg scheduled passenger air lmnsportation to conduct basic security lraining for their flight and cabin c r e w m e m b in order to prepare e Mitose, 1980; Parker, 1960, 1982). From China, the lraditional forms of self defense spread thmugh Japan, Korea, Okinawa, and eventually inm tho United States. Kung Fu translates as "skill" or "ability" and can encompass paintins and cooking, but it is most cornonly associated with the skill of fighting (Corcoran & Farkas, 1983). There are hundreds of forms of Kung Fu and they cau be broken down into groups of fighting skills, health development, and dance. Tae Kwon-Do simply means the art of kicking and punching. The system trains the mind and body with an emphasis on developing moral character. The use of the feet for fighting is the %ademark" and beauty of Tae Kwon-Do. Karate m e m empty hand and it is an art of 1 Overchuk: Self Defense 101: An Exploration of Self Defense Training and Its Published by ERAU Scholarly Commons, 2009 self defense and sport. Unlike Judo or Jujutsy karate is not a grappling art. The emphasis is to develop the hands, feet, and body to deliver blows to an aggressor. Kenpo stands For ''Law of the Fist"(Parker, 1960). Kenpo is stated to be the first"Americanized" martial art (Corcoran & Farkes, 1983). The emphasis of the art is flexibility of movements which are tailored to the individual not the (Corcoran & Farkes, 1983; Parker, 1960, 1982; Parker & Gow. 1967). Shldents are encouraged to alter the moments to fit their needs, but not the underlying principle of the self defense technique. Kenpo utilizes elbows, h ~ s , kicks and punchcs h u g b both circular and Smear movements. Jujutsu is literally the art of suppleness (Corcoran & Farkas, 1983). Its self defense techniques were developed for effectiveness in combat, which included weapons such as the sword. Jujutsu uses gragplig, throws, punches, kicks, and joint locks. If an aviation student had an interest in Mioing in the traditional forms of self defense, they would most likely develop the basic movements used in nearly all self defense teclmiques. The only questionlcaution would be, how effective would this lmowledge be in an aviation environment. Traditionalmartial arts (non-sport) techniques were practiced as weapons ans and were designed to kill, maim, and break bones (Raegar, 1982; Murray, 2006). Some aspects of the martial arts are used for personal gowth and developmental reasons (Overchuk, 2002, 2005). With the mass introduction of children into the martial arts, tbe arts have evolved into family and sport activities emphiking the beauty of form and competition. In the fighting arts literature, there are questions being asked on whether the marlid arts are h l y "War (marrial) Arts." (Draegw, 1982; Rosmbaum, 2006) According to these tacticians, years of evolution and modification has altered the martial arts causing them to lose most oftheir combative application. In other words, they have become more spm and family oriented. This trail~iing could givc a false sense of security to the aviation student if hetshe was not aware of the limitations found in sport martial arts. Because human aggressive behavior canvary 6om simple non-wmpliance to e m m e violence (Bor, 2007; King, 1999) certain martial m s training may not meet the neods of a flight crew. Therefore, a course in self defense needs to be developedlchosen wblch emphasizes thc necessities of the flight crew and the environment where they find themselves (Williamson, 2003). Military psychologists and law enforcement miners have mcognized tht need for modification in combative training and pm#ctive techniques (Grossman, 1996; Murray, 2006). Accordingto Williamson (2003). a flight crew selfdefense program should take into account the environment where the flight crews find themselves. The defensive system should involve striking, grappling, and weapons techniques all within a realistic environment. What Williamson is describing is what some martial tacticians describe as "reality based hinii '(Murray, 2006; Q u h , 1996; Siddle, 200 1). Realistic basedmining (RBT) prepares law tnforcement professionals for the types of encounters they will experience on the job (Fauher & Danaher, 1997). From the Author's perspective, the self defense techniques in reality based training are similar to the ones found in the lmditional system of self defense. Basically, there are only so many ways a person can punch, kick, gab, throw, and counter an aggressive attack, Many times "advanced self defense techniques" are combinations and variation of the basic self-defense movements. As Fauher & Danaher (1997) have stated in their publication, there are no "magic bullets" to controlling a subject. Therefore, even if an aviation student engages in either traditional forms of self defense or self defense designad for flight crews, they should understand that not all techniques or aggressive encounters will have perfect solutions or endings, The difference between traditional self defense training and reality bawd training is the way the technique is taught to the person, the environment where it is taught, and the introduction ofthe adrenaline swess response during the applicatidpractice of the self defense technique. Self defense techniques in RBT emphasize gross motor movements and they are performed at 1 1 1 power and fill speed on a well protected andpaddedperson (Quin, 1996). , S W g at a well protected person whb moves unpredidablg is a better simulation of reality than hitting a punching bag or pad. High power skikes are delivered to the head, neck, , abdomen, and groin. The fight continues "unabated" and to the ground if necessary. When it is clear the aggressor is , thwarted, the fight is discontiuued. Reality Bawd Training seems very beneficial to flight students or pilots especially for short term training. An unpredictable padded aggressor (as opposed to a static punch or striking pad) will quickly expose the student to their strengths and limitations, as well as, to what works and what does not work. Not all martial arts W i for p~lvts will be equally efFtctive, so training in an environment that is unique to a flight crew is essential. Mobility is l i ited because of the many obstacles in the cramped spaces of the cockpit and cabin. Therefore, h c y , complicated, jumping and spinning techniques will not be effective (Williamsg 2003). These complex and fine motor skill movements are further hiidcred by the adrenaline stress response during an