Debunking Self Defense Myths: A Review of Hard2Hurt’s Video
Icy Mike from the YouTube channel Hard2Hurt raises a vital discussion around the questionable self-defense advice that people receive, especially those that originate from members of the police force. In his video titled “Why Do Cops Give Terrible Self Defense Advice?”, he aims to dispel some common misconceptions regarding the use of firearms and personal defense. The Misunderstood Fake Rules A look at the video makes one thing abundantly clear: a prevalent myth in the self-defense world is the so-called “requirement” to shoot once a firearm is drawn or pointed at someone. This belief, as Icy Mike explains, is unfounded and can lead to unnecessary harm to both the self-defense practitioner and the perceived attacker. The falsehood is baseless and can have detrimental effects, because its application disregards the context of the situation and the other possible courses of action. Fundamentally flawed, its propagation, as highlighted in the video, seems often traced back to contrasts in advice from law enforcement individuals. Clarity Over Misdirection: Police Advice Not a Golden Standard Taking advice from police officers might seem logical as they are figures of authority. However, it’s essential to remember that although trained for dangerous situations, not all police officers are experts in explaining laws of self-defense. This is further complicated by the fact that they are not supposed to give legal advice. An Objective Look at Reasonable Force A litmus test for legitimate self-defense actions lies in the concept of ‘objectively reasonable force’. The standard, which is written into nearly every U.S. law relating to the topic, stipulates that force used in personal defense must be proportionate to the threat faced. This principle is the same for both law enforcement and civilians. What Icy Mike emphasizes crucially in his video is that context and dynamics of the situation play a vital role in determining if an act is justified. Any use of force, including brandishing and potentially using a weapon, should be assessed on its necessariness, immediacy, and proportionality, rather than blindly following fallacious rules. Maintain Critical Thinking and Open-mindedness The Hard2Hurt video brings to light the importance of self-research and being wary of any definitive-sounding advice received without proper validation. It emphasizes embracing a critical thinking approach and consulting knowledgeable sources or professionals in the field to gain a more accurate understanding of self-defense laws. In conclusion, Icy Mike’s video sparks a vital conversation about the way we approach self-defense. The importance of context, understanding legal boundaries, and not falling prey to oversimplified false theories is emphasized. Deciphering accurate and effective self-defense strategies requires critical thinking, thorough research, and good judgment. In the realm of self-defense, broad generalizations can often lead to misconceptions. It’s paramount to question, learn, and make informed decisions. The video is thus a handy reminder that every situation is unique, and what works for one scenario might not apply at all to another.Blablabla
Hard2Hurt is a well-known YouTube channel run by Icy Mike, a self-defense expert. He specializes in teaching practical self-defense techniques, fitness training, and fight science. Icy Mike combines knowledge, humor, and raw sincerity to impart valuable lessons, helping individuals learn how to protect themselves effectively.
Self-Defence Block
Support the channel by downloading Hunting Clash: https://huntingclash.link/hard2hurt
Use code HUNTWITHHARD2HURT for bonus in game perks!
Upvoted for use of the phrase, "im gonna mirk you"
xD
Obviously you should've shot the 8nhear old girl opening the door. Clearly she presented a lethal threat.
Alright Mike, i got one single counter point/ reasonable addition. I'll admit i dont know exactly the truth of this story as it was told to me third hand or so. For clarification, i live in Texas. Friend of friend heard something in the middle of the night, got his gun and phone, went to check, and someone was attempting to break in through a porch window i believe it was. He got the guy to surrender easily enough, called the cops and held the guy there at gun point until the cops got there. At the sound of the sirens, or the lights, whatever, this guy seemed like he was going to rush the home owner, take off, whatever, so homeowner fires a round into the ground, a deliberate warning shot. SUPPOSEDLY, the homeowner was charged for unlawful discharge of a firearm or some such nonsense.
This is probably a gun guy urban legend that has always happened to a guy of a guy of a guy someone knows, right, and thats lead to this made-up law that you've so wonderfully torn apart here. Just wondering if theres any truth or substance to this, to your own personal knowledge
I have actually had this exact scenario happen were a friend that was a cop advised me that I should have shot a home intruder. I chose not too because I had reason to believe this person was mentally disabled. Right after he told me I should have shot this person he told me a story where he chose not to kill a armed and violent gang leader during a raid. This was not a newbie cop either he had many years of law enforcement behind him. Needless to say I won't just shoot any home intruder that appears. I will first try to determine the nature of the threat and use appropriate force. I was fortunate enough to have that time in my incident.
It would be risky for anyone to draw up a gun just to threaten or act as a warning to the object who could have hidden a gun. I think the police's advice is accurate for his position and duty on which his life safety is also important, despite maintaining the rules of law.
My opinion is to not draw up a gun, unless you are deciding to fire a shot or feel certain that you have to fire.🙏
I have actually protected my family from trying to break into our hotel room by grabbing my gun, pointed, and saying: "stop, or I'll shoot" and that was enough to stop them right then and there.
Discharging your weapon CAN get you in trouble plain and simple.
I guess objectively reasonable applies almost everywhere on the world. And the myths evolve because people lie and/or don't think. Here in Austria we had those … "You're not allowed to defend yourself anymore". Yes because you kept hitting the guy after he went already went down and wasn't a threat anymore.🤦
This guy is like the yankee Marshall of the martial arts and self defense community.
Cops give terrible self defense advise bc theu are never held accountable for their actions and are able to do what the fuck ever they want.
The problem isn't the advice but the prosecutors. The logic is a legal issue based around the logic train. "brandishing is pointing your weapon at someone to create fear." perfectly understandable if you are trying to avoid a fight with someone about to start a fight but when you do so is jurisdictional in nature. Not just the local laws but the local community's beliefs. The other reason is why you don't give a warning shot. "if you feared enough to shoot your gun it should have been at what gave you worry."
The trickiest thing about firearm usage in self defense is knowing when to use it and how to prove it.
The funniest shit is that California has the best written laws around self defense fire arm usage. Just remember the process is also the punishment. Just look at the Rittenhouse trial.
Your country is fucked up if you draw your gun that often as a cop.
In most European country, unless you're in a tactical units and therefore fighting "real" violent crime, or dangerous situation, the chances are that for a every day cop, there won't be a reason good enough to draw their gun in their whole career. And if they do, there might be a need for an investigation, potentially temporarily not being on the street, and some psychological support.
Doing this as often as in the US is so unhealthy. The culture is really bad is everything is a threat. Funny enough, the US used to be a place that European looked up to. But now, even for holiday, many don't feel like taking the risk to be in the US. Such a pity that the US came to this situation.
in the army, the only thing I was told that was similar to this, was don't fire warning shots and don't shoot to wound. if you must fire your weapon, shoot with the intent to kill.
Tbf they're currently arresting people in England for mean words towards Charlie boy I know the basis for the Western legal system is English common law but they're not exactly a beacon of freedom and justice
Simply showing that you have a firearm is generally enough to discourage an attack. You should be willing to use it but it should be that last resort. There are some places in the US where it is illegal to "brandish" a weapon. In Indiana where I live it is perfectly legal so long as you are not using it as an unprovoked threat of violence. If someone tells you they are going to beat your ass or whatever, it is perfectly legal here to show them your shootin iron. However Indiana has very strong self defense laws so I understand it's not the same everywhere.
In Germany you can use anything for Self Defense but you have to Use the Most harmless thing That will end the attack on you other people or your posessions also you could use a illegal weapon like an illegal gun you Will only get Charged for owning the gun of it was your only way to Shot the Person to protect you so you could threaten someone With a gun if it stops the attack
For the same reasons you do.
There's a little bit of truth about pulling a weapon and being charged if you don't shoot the guy. It's called brandishing. One guy cut off of school bus and stopped on the road in front of him and loaded a pistol in the view of the driver in the school bus. The driver called 911 the pistol man was arrested and said he had a right to just load a pistol anywhere he wanted. The judge thought this was dramatic enough display of a pistol that he took the guy's gun rights and gave him some time for brandishing a weapon. Nothing about this suggest you should shoot someone but everybody wants to be the guy in the old west that shoots the bad guy and is the hero like Matt Dillon. If you pull your gun and don't shoot them you will be charged that's a fact it is a crime. It's a lesser included crime probably for pull your gun and do shoot them.
If you shoot someone running away from you or in the back you sir are going to jail. There are very real and compelling reasons to not shoot someone when your gun is drawn.
Pointing a gun when you are not threaten is dejure assault.
english nation cops are subhuman. 0%
Yeah, I'd especially not trust American cops with explaining any complicated issues. They literally need 10 times less study hours on average than law enforcement in other first world countries to become active policemen. It's baffling and terrifying to even think that Americans let people with such basic training have power over their freedom and safety.
The thing I was taught, was never draw your gun unless you have too use it. Because it might be brandishing and if the person might decide too de escalate the situation and get his buddies to attack again. But my counter is if you have too draw your gun in a location.. dont stay in that location then.
I had a situation on Halloween where I drew down on a subject with a knife. He didn’t get shot because he complied. I was able to articulate everything that happened and I did everything right.
This man referenced hunterxhunter while doing a sponsorship for a hunting game that’s crazy to
me.
Okay, in 2013, the CDC estimated that there are 500 thousand to 3 million defensive firearm uses every year. There is no fucking way that 500k, let alone 3 million criminals are getting popped every year, or 500k people are going on trial for a defensive shooting.
Drawing the firearm in preparation of a potential, perceived threat is different from pointing it at a target. It's also different from being forced to draw. I can't think of a genuine self defense scenario that a non-LEO would run into which would cause me, specifically with my current aptitude with my particular firearms, to point the firearm without it being objectively reasonable to fire it. If they are close enough to force the draw, they are also likely close enough to force the shot. That doesn't mean continuing to shoot, and it doesn't mean firing because someone caught you by surprise. I think the concept is more that you should fire with intention. You specifically are aware of why you are choosing to shoot or not shoot. This is the essential point you seem to be getting across.
Because cops don’t care about your safety? I mean, they are henchmen for the government
This is a seriously good breakdown of the issue of self-defence, reasonable force and dangerous situations. Thanks for the insight.
People who are telling you this didn't understand the information they were given. What the officer was probably trying to say is that if you drew your weapon in self-defense and didn't have to shoot it you might find yourself in a questionable legal situation on whether or not it was appropriate for you to draw your weapon in the first place.
The phrase, "like children, or rookie cops" can be slapped on so many other scenarios LMAO
They've all been reading old adventure stories where the mighty warrior is dishonoured and loses face if he draws his sword without drawing blood.
UK force has to be reasonable and proportionate. Not the easiest thing to define……….
There is a really good book called the "Law of Self Defense" by Attorney andrew branca. It breaks down all 5 elements of self-defense and has a lookup chart in back for statues and case law for all 50 states. — naturally with the caveat that the law is ever evolving and that these statues could have changed between time of publication and you reading it.
Non the less it's an amazing resource for learning self-defense law in America.
This is awesome! I'm making video lectures about Introduction to Philosophy and Critical Thinking, and you're giving very good examples of exactly what I am talking about (a bit more abstractly)!
IME cops tend to be know it alls. They'll just say the most off the wall stuff with 100 seriousness and stare at you like if you doubt what they're saying they'll melt your brain with their eyes. Does it get ingrained in them that they always have to be right or they lose control of the situation ?
I love your videos. I teach a college level class in argumentation. I may use this video as an example of why arguments of authority are very weak. Thank you.
I enjoy the fact that the secret takeway from this video is that critical research skills are invaluable for self defense. Chalk one up for the liberal arts
I believe there was a situation where a DA prosecuted someone for “brandishing” when rioters demanded he get out of his vehicle. That situation is both confusing and messed up from a legal perspective.
Was hearing my boss and co worker at work talking about somebody pulling a gun and not firing and getting charged. But at the same time im thinking is that just something they heard. Immediately went back to this vid.
9:27 Priceless still pic.
in general terms: "when someone has a very strong opinion about something, it's often because they heard it from someone else." they agreed with it, and never thought enough about it to be able to discuss it. so they dismiss or react disproportionately negatively to criticism about it.