Quote:
Originally Posted by frostfire
You do want to secure the weapon.
GratefulCitizen, are you referring to the psychiatric ward protocol for volatile clients ie. each person hold/pin each limb to the wall or ground, and the fifth person watch for the head. In this case, the fifth person's role to prevent gray matter spilling on the floor is unnecessary of course  |
I wasn't implying that the weapon should be ignored.
After they got the weapon hand under some degree of control, they needed to continue on the offensive against the person.
When they focus on the weapon, the bad guy can focus on weapon retention and regain his bearings.
The first guy siezed the initiative by going for the weapon.
After that, the initiative needed to be maintained, preferably by going after the bad guy's balance.
I suppose the term commonly used here would be "staying inside his OODA loop".
The bad guy initially kept his balance and made sure everyone was in front of him.
Once the opportunity presented itself (regained control of his weapon) he went on the offensive immediately.
The good guys were primarily acting defensively (against the weapon).
This is why the bad guy got away.
The technique was not in direct reference to what is done in the psyche ward.
(But it is a good analogy.)
Taking someone down when there's a numerical advantage just works better.
The striking was pointless.
Unless you are exceptionally skilled, striking is going to do no good against someone who is still on their feet and pumped full of adrenaline.