Bringing a knife to a gunfight- Tueller Drill (21 foot rule)

[OldSchool45b]

Some background on how and why Dennis Tueller came up with this drill. While he was a trainer for SLPD one of their officers was involved in a shooting where a guy pulled a knife, the cop shot him. He was roughly 21 feet away. The family sued so Dennis went out on the streets of SLC and had hundreds of people of all shapes and sizes run at an officer with a fake knife. The average as we know was about 1.5 seconds.

There is now case law where the courts have established that out to 30 feet is acceptable and reasonable for concealed carry holders given the added time required to draw from concealment. I have learned not to be surprised and laugh when I hear students say "I would never draw my weapon on someone 50 ft away". 50 feet is not far and there is a difference between drawing it and making ready to defend yourself and drawing it and exposing the weapon to plain view. That would be brandishing in Utah. But drawing it, keeping it behind your back or leg is a perfectly reasonable and court approved response in Utah. It also gives more options. Personally at that distance, or even 30 feet I would try to move off line, put distance or obstacles between myself and my attacker/s.

I know a lot of guys who are experienced knife fighters, or at least trained in it. We do some pretty good training in the SF with knives, but these guys are a different league. If someone like that wants to cut you, you are screwed. But the Tueller drill was not designed to fight against knife fighters per say. At the time of the incident there were not a lot of knife fighters out there. It was simply a matter of self defense against a guy with a knife. And an experienced knife fighter KNOWS about the Tueller drill and wont display their weapon until they are right up on you. Like I said, chances are, you are really screwed. Case law in Utah has actually established that this baseline distance is actually acceptable for any potentially deadly weapon, not just a knife. One case was a large rock the aggressor threatened the defendant with, to "bash his skull in".

The point of the Tueller drill is to establish some basic court accepted guidelines and distances for self defense. It isn't a magic talisman nor is your gun. But knowing it and training on it can make the difference in your defense, and keep you out of jail if you ever find yourself in that situation.

[jamoni]

Gelgoog, Murph, could you guys tone down the chest thumping, please? This is an interesting discussion, and I think both of you have some valid points. Let's not ruin it by getting angry at each other.

[Regular Guy]

If you catch the knife hand, you can do this to disarm the knife. A grip is nothing without a thumb.



@ 0:11, now instead of head locking you'd palm strike the face/grip the chin, block the knife strike coming in, step through and sweep the leg, HARD. Drive the head into the ground. Again, not a starting off technique. (Watch the rest of the vid if you want, I didn't.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E5sAxIRBo0
These are some good moves, but you need to do them very hard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq6j9HyIdH8
@0:35 this is very difficult but after a few shots or the guy is "displaying" a knife, it can work. Worst case is you've moved to the outside.

Before someone says judo is crap, Ahem.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBnWgT2en1U

Just one last note, if you can "catch" the hand, when you have the knife hand in your hands, trap the thumb and press is against the handle. This "forces" the attacker to hold the knife and negates the attackers ability to swap the knife to the other hand.

[Biggin]

I suppose my comment could have been more topical.

What I was saying is that I am not going to willingly go to the ground for any reason. That, in my not trained in ground fighting mind, just seems totally illogical. I'm not saying ground fighting skills aren't a vital skill to have, nor am I under the illusion that I can't be brought to the ground but going to the ground means you are in a much bigger world of shit than before. If I can keep my feet while creating distance, that would be much preferred to taking a charge and ending up on my back.

Just think. Standing, you can easily access your gun if you carry strong side IWB or OWB like most people. When you're on your back with someone on top of you (someone potentially much larger than you) you now have their weight and your weight on top of your gun. It's also a lot harder to avoid their friend that is there (I forgot the statistic but it's a majority)% of the time and his place kicks to your head.

Even if you carry AIWB.... yeah it's easier to draw from the ground than carrying strong side, but it's still going to be hard with some guy on top of you and with you (hopefully) scrunched up into a guard position.

In both cases, no matter how much you practice, draw strokes will be slower than charging asshole and shit's getting physical.

I really like the idea of running in the other direction if at all possible. I think that should be everyone's first line of defense.... GTFO.

[TDW586]

I'm not liking the dog catcher. It's quite complicated and assumes the guys arm is trapped. It's not, if the attacker simply pulls his arm back you've moved your arms to the other side of your body and the attacker has an open shot.

Your technique sounds interesting, I'd like to train it someday.

As for the dogcatcher, it's really not complicated. It doesn't assume the arm is trapped, if you view the entire framwork and some more drills (they don't put everything on youtube), there are a lot of options and ways to disengage if you don't trap the arm, and it does account for the attacker changing angle of attack by pulling his arm back and going for the other side. That's where the "pulsing" portion comes into effect. If your attacker fully pulls back and goes for the other side, it's a matter of footwork and positioning, which prevents him from easily doing that and puts you in a good position to deal with it.

I'll see if I can bring the DLO series down next time I come to your area, you might change your mind (I'm assuming you haven't seen the entire seminar/DVD, if you have, never mind).

[Kelvar]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but if so, I think it bears repeating:

Disclaimer: I haven't tested this yet, but this is my current hypothesis.

I believe a lot of people fail to take away from this drill what I perceive to be the primary lesson--the real issue is not "knife vs. gun, which one is better?" (Should be obvious), the real issue is "Action vs. Reaction." It is extremely difficult to respond to *any* type of threat when the aggressor has already started to attack. As the good guys (we are the good guys, right?) we inherently, by definition, are forced to be the ones doing the RE-acting in any sort of deadly force scenario.

When I was a LEO I saw a demonstration of a guy sitting in the driver's seat of a car with a cap gun and several officers participated in this drill with Red Guns. The drill was that the officer was to go through a "typical" traffic stop, and respond as soon as he perceived a threat. Everyone *knew* the guy in the car was going to pull, point and "fire" the cap gun at that officer. No one was ever able to respond quickly enough. (At least, from the holster--but I'm pretty sure they also tried it where the officer *started* with his weapon drawn and he still couldn't react fast enough). Alas, it was a large crowd and not everyone got to try it, so I didn't get to play.

So, I don't think this is a lesson on the alleged superiority of knives, I think it is a lesson on reaction time. I wonder what this drill would look like if you replaced the aggressor's knife with a pistol and tried it with simunitions, or pellet guns or something? I know that sounds like something from a western, but I still think that's the real lesson here.

Of course, I'm not a gunfighter (as anyone from MilCopp will tell you ), so I may be mistaken, and I'd love to hear what some of our resident experts think.

(ETA: I'd welcome Dave's, doc's or TDW's opinion, for example).

[TDW586]

I'm not an expert, by any means. I've trained with some good people, is all.

You're right, though. It is a matter of action versus reaction, and OODA loop. At extremely close range, I've got to disagree, and knife is absolutely more dangerous (a "better weapon") than a gun. It is not a better weapon in general, because at anything over, say, seven yards the gun is massively more capable.

The Tueller drill really just demonstrates how difficult it is to stop a determined attack, how quickly an attacker can close distance, and how important movement and combatives are.

[Kelvar]

I'm not an expert, by any means. I've trained with some good people, is all.

You're right, though. It is a matter of action versus reaction, and OODA loop. At extremely close range, I've got to disagree, and knife is absolutely more dangerous (a "better weapon") than a gun. It is not a better weapon in general, because at anything over, say, seven yards the gun is massively more capable.

The Tueller drill really just demonstrates how difficult it is to stop a determined attack, how quickly an attacker can close distance, and how important movement and combatives are.

Thanks, man. Like I said, I'm always willing to learn and to admit when I don't know something (which is very often). In this case, I'll plead ignorance once more: what does OODA mean? (I know what ODF means. )

[TDW586]

I'm not an expert, by any means. I've trained with some good people, is all.

You're right, though. It is a matter of action versus reaction, and OODA loop. At extremely close range, I've got to disagree, and knife is absolutely more dangerous (a "better weapon") than a gun. It is not a better weapon in general, because at anything over, say, seven yards the gun is massively more capable.

The Tueller drill really just demonstrates how difficult it is to stop a determined attack, how quickly an attacker can close distance, and how important movement and combatives are.

Thanks, man. Like I said, I'm always willing to learn and to admit when I don't know something (which is very often). In this case, I'll plead ignorance once more: what does OODA mean?

Observe-Orient-Decide-Act. Look up Boyd's loop, there's way too much information to summarize here.

[Regular Guy]

I'm not liking the dog catcher. It's quite complicated and assumes the guys arm is trapped. It's not, if the attacker simply pulls his arm back you've moved your arms to the other side of your body and the attacker has an open shot.

Your technique sounds interesting, I'd like to train it someday.

As for the dogcatcher, it's really not complicated. It doesn't assume the arm is trapped, if you view the entire framwork and some more drills (they don't put everything on youtube), there are a lot of options and ways to disengage if you don't trap the arm, and it does account for the attacker changing angle of attack by pulling his arm back and going for the other side. That's where the "pulsing" portion comes into effect. If your attacker fully pulls back and goes for the other side, it's a matter of footwork and positioning, which prevents him from easily doing that and puts you in a good position to deal with it.

I'll see if I can bring the DLO series down next time I come to your area, you might change your mind (I'm assuming you haven't seen the entire seminar/DVD, if you have, never mind).

I'd really like to get a class together with my Coach and the GA, NC, SC folks. I think and have believed the ECQC is essential to self defense. Let me talk to my Coach and see what he's got open in the next month or so. Granted, I have not done a full on dog catcher class. I have done years of knife fighting and knife defense so my (our) technique is brewed and distilled from that and savate, kali and sabre fighting. I'm not presenting mine as the end of all things, it just works for me and some others I've trained with.

[Murph]

So, I don't think this is a lesson on the alleged superiority of knives, I think it is a lesson on reaction time. I wonder what this drill would look like if you replaced the aggressor's knife with a pistol and tried it with simunitions, or pellet guns or something? I know that sounds like something from a western, but I still think that's the real lesson here.

I've shot dueling trees and plate racks against people. It would be an equal initiative event, where the two shooters would start on command. There were lots of varying skills levels. What I'd like to note, is that it wasn't always a contest of skill. There were a few times when more skilled shooters lost to less skilled shooters. The whole idea of performance under pressure really came into play, and was very apparent. There were other cases were a shooter could clear half the rack of 6 before the other shooter got their first shot off.

Now lets say we change how the contest starts, Shooter A can only draw and fire after Shooter B fires their first shot. Could Shooter A ever win? The answer from my experience is, "Well, it depends."

And it's a whole other ball of wax when factoring in any reactions to being shot, if it was a shoot-out and not a contest.

[Regular Guy]

Action Vs. Reaction.

That's one thing that we discuss at length in my classes all the time. Our coach goes with this theory, it's not his, that you react with the block. That's stopping the knife and counter striking the knife weilding appendage. The elbow, knee, headbutt, throw, what ever you do after the counter is turning the tables on the aggressor. If you just block, you're just reacting. If you begin your "assault" then you take the initiative from the aggressor.
Once you start raining your actions on to the attacker, the attacker then has to react to what you're doing. This is key, IMO. Doc and Dave alluded to it with the violence of action. Troof about knives is once you accept this is going to suck and I have to end this as fast as I can with the most effective means I can muster. With knife fights, the shorter it is, the less you get cut. Accept you'll need to be hyper violent and it will be short.

As always, I'm no expert, this is based of dojo sparring.

[Kelvar]

Observe-Orient-Decide-Act. Look up Boyd's loop, there's way too much information to summarize here.

Thanks, man.

[TheLastOne]

Action Vs. Reaction.

That's one thing that we discuss at length in my classes all the time. Our coach goes with this theory, it's not his, that you react with the block. That's stopping the knife and counter striking the knife weilding appendage. The elbow, knee, headbutt, throw, what ever you do after the counter is turning the tables on the aggressor. If you just block, you're just reacting. If you begin your "assault" then you take the initiative from the aggressor.
Once you start raining your actions on to the attacker, the attacker then has to react to what you're doing. This is key, IMO. Doc and Dave alluded to it with the violence of action. Troof about knives is once you accept this is going to suck and I have to end this as fast as I can with the most effective means I can muster. With knife fights, the shorter it is, the less you get cut. Accept you'll need to be hyper violent and it will be short.

As always, I'm no expert, this is based of dojo sparring.

VOA 'fixes' a lot of flaws in technique Sounds like our training is similar in some respects. We should have had a spar in the parking lot after bbq! My ground work is pretty bad, especially against bjj guys (but again, voa helps! Pounding someone in the face repeatedly fixes a lot of problems). It's pretty scarey how easy it is for someone to get a person on the ground once things get up close and personal.

Anywho, our defense is similar: 45degree block to offending appendage, simultaneous counter attack with punch/elbow of opposite hand while bursting in, and from there choose your fav flavor of knees, elbows, inside leg kicks, groin kicks, etc etc, whatever's available and most devastating and DON'T FRIGGIN STOP. Our 'control' is to either secure the offending wrist and push down and back (basically aiming to put their hand into their back pocket type location) while tenderizing the rest of them, or to wrap that arm up similarly to what you describe. We've been moving towards the wrap up, mostly because if you miss that wrist you end up wrapping up anyway. Either way, I think we're on the same page about the tenderizing being the crucial part here. Can't get stabbed if their computer gets reset.

You gotta get your coach to get some of the shock knives! They feel like you're getting sliced (like when you've cut your finger, not that bad of pain) but the SOUND those suckers make intensifies the stress level like nothing else

[doc66]

. We should have had a spar in the parking lot after bbq! My ground work is pretty bad, especially against bjj guys

Okay, I'll admit it, I read this as bj guys and thought to myself, "Why is he on the ground in parking lots," coupled with, "How often does he have to fight off guys in the parking lot giving BJs?" And then I thought, "Do I really want to know?"



We used the SpyderCo trainers because you can fold them like the real thing until needed... I've trained with those shock knives, and I admit, they are pretty "realistic" in the "what the fuck just happened?" sense. In getting stabbed in real life, I didn't know I was until I saw the blood, and I thought it was the other guys.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but if so, I think it bears repeating:

Disclaimer: I haven't tested this yet, but this is my current hypothesis.

I believe a lot of people fail to take away from this drill what I perceive to be the primary lesson--the real issue is not "knife vs. gun, which one is better?" (Should be obvious), the real issue is "Action vs. Reaction." It is extremely difficult to respond to *any* type of threat when the aggressor has already started to attack. As the good guys (we are the good guys, right?) we inherently, by definition, are forced to be the ones doing the RE-acting in any sort of deadly force scenario.

When I was a LEO I saw a demonstration of a guy sitting in the driver's seat of a car with a cap gun and several officers participated in this drill with Red Guns. The drill was that the officer was to go through a "typical" traffic stop, and respond as soon as he perceived a threat. Everyone *knew* the guy in the car was going to pull, point and "fire" the cap gun at that officer. No one was ever able to respond quickly enough. (At least, from the holster--but I'm pretty sure they also tried it where the officer *started* with his weapon drawn and he still couldn't react fast enough). Alas, it was a large crowd and not everyone got to try it, so I didn't get to play.

So, I don't think this is a lesson on the alleged superiority of knives, I think it is a lesson on reaction time. I wonder what this drill would look like if you replaced the aggressor's knife with a pistol and tried it with simunitions, or pellet guns or something? I know that sounds like something from a western, but I still think that's the real lesson here.

Of course, I'm not a gunfighter (as anyone from MilCopp will tell you ), so I may be mistaken, and I'd love to hear what some of our resident experts think.

(ETA: I'd welcome Dave's, doc's or TDW's opinion, for example).

We did something similar with Simunitions, and did something similar in the drill. Our scenario was a car stop, with the suspect (me) in the drivers seat. The pistol was actually laying on the passengers seat in full view. The deal was I would not pick up the pistol until the officer said something about it--either by giving me an order pertaining to the pistol or starting to draw and move themselves. What we found was that the officer is always behind the curve in shooting, and if he has a level three holster, even further. There is no way in Valhalla he's going to get his pistol out and shoot by just standing there and observing. His reaction time is just enough slower that I managed to get a round into nearly everyone once they saw the pistol, commented on it and began their own action sequence. (Mine was simple; act stupid, grab the pistol and shoot.) So what we found was that most officers get shot, but the ones who take the "lesser" hits, are the ones who start moving as soon as they suspect something is up. The one I didn't get a shot off at was the one guy who did a passenger side approach. He saw the pistol and had me before I could see him passed all the lights from the patrol car. We cycled everyone through so that they could not talk to each other by having the guys who had not done the scenario in a paperwork training session in one room, and pulled them out for the car stop game, then sending them home right after the car stop was over. It worked pretty well.

It is a lessen in reaction time. It's about how you start to take control of a situation that you really have no control over. This is why we advocate movement, and movement toward cover, at all times. Let's call cover is something that you put between you and your opponent. I think that the cover and concealment adages are a little much for this particular situation; but getting something between you and them is never a bad idea.

As for grappling with someone; while it's been years since I've played with martial arts, at least they have a way to handle it, and it's better than running, 'cause I can't run very fast. What I've found when people are trying to do something stupid with a blunt object or a knife is move off line, create distance (if possible) and if they are really close (usually the case) close as fast as you can, lock up the arm that has that thing and do as much damage to that appendage as you can. Usually, people--everyday people--tend to concentrate on trying to free the weapon so they can use it against you. A smart fighter lets you get locked in on the weapon and then beats the shit out of you while you are worried about the weapon.

[crypto]

In POST they teach you a drill where you do a controlled backwards fall while drawing your gun. Feet up in the air pointed towards the bad guy so that you can shoot between your legs

Thats awesome, maybe they teach this at the advanced course:

[doc66]

gelgoog; I once heard someone say, "whenever I want to know what was current ten years ago, I look at how the police are training today."

I remember when we (LEOs, not MilCopp) trained that as well. We strongly encourage our students to stay off their backs these days. It's not that you don't have to understand what to do, should you find yourself on the ground, but the truth is, you really don't want to go to the ground on purpose. You are now limited to only one tactical move; kicking around like a turtle flipped over whilst praying.

Engaging from the upright is a far better choice.



Let's face it folks, how many of us outside of Call of Duty World at War have to worry about the possibility of someone brandishing a blade and running full tilt at you? Most of the time, regardless of what the Armed Citizen reports in the American Rifleman, simply looking like you are about to draw down is enough to discourage the common ne'er do well. If you've got someone running at you with a knife from any distance, you are either a LEO who just got the crazy-guy call of his life, or really, really, good at pissing off your ex-wife.

[jnathan]

This entire post just rubs me the wrong way. Both because I train BJJ and because I train things OTHER than BJJ.

Way too much of the training people would like to apply to an encounter with a knife is trained without a knife. Obviously a kimura or any other lock is predicated on controlling the arm, but both videos piss me off because the first one showed a kimura from the guard, while wearing a gi, and the second one assumed that the attacker is going to stand there. They won't, and that knife hand doesn't just stop when it misses, it keeps moving and so does the attacker.

That knife hand keeps moving and if the attacker has even the most meager capability to think, they continue trying to stab and slash you. Your plan for how to respond shouldn't start at #2 (after you control the knife) when #1 is controlling the knife.

What BJJ does well is allow people to train at full speed and any training applying to knife defense needs to be practiced that way or it's just more hyperbole.

-Jeff

If you catch the knife hand, you can do this to disarm the knife. A grip is nothing without a thumb.



@ 0:11, now instead of head locking you'd palm strike the face/grip the chin, block the knife strike coming in, step through and sweep the leg, HARD. Drive the head into the ground. Again, not a starting off technique. (Watch the rest of the vid if you want, I didn't.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E5sAxIRBo0
These are some good moves, but you need to do them very hard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq6j9HyIdH8
@0:35 this is very difficult but after a few shots or the guy is "displaying" a knife, it can work. Worst case is you've moved to the outside.

Before someone says judo is crap, Ahem.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBnWgT2en1U

Just one last note, if you can "catch" the hand, when you have the knife hand in your hands, trap the thumb and press is against the handle. This "forces" the attacker to hold the knife and negates the attackers ability to swap the knife to the other hand.

[Regular Guy]

Jnathan, you've obviously missed a lot of other things I've been saying. Chiefly, that none of the locks, throws disarming techniques work until you've tenderized the subject. Going straight for a kimura against a knife is suicide. You're going to have to use blocks and strikes first then if necessary you can kimura. I'm certainly not saying go straight to your back and try a kimura. However, if you're on your back that techniques works. We just spent hours doing it n class vs a knife on the ground.
Eta the video with the gi. I specifically said some where about head control instead of grabbing the gi.
I apologize if there is confusion but its quite difficult to explain complex moves over the internet. It'd be much easier if we were all in the dojo and I could show you what I man.

[jnathan]

I may be cherrypicking, because I'm scrutinizing the videos you posted. My point remains the same, though. You can't learn BJJ if you don't roll and likewise you can't really learn knife defense without doing the equivalent. Working full speed with a rubber or wooden knife. The sooner you (the royal you) accept you're going to get cut, the sooner you'll be operating within a realistic frame of reference.

And if we're tenderizing, we're really talking about striking.

-Jeff

Jnathan, you've obviously missed a lot of other things I've been saying. Chiefly, that none of the locks, throws disarming techniques work until you've tenderized the subject. Going straight for a kimura against a knife is suicide. You're going to have to use blocks and strikes first then if necessary you can kimura. I'm certainly not saying go straight to your back and try a kimura. However, if you're on your back that techniques works. We just spent hours doing it n class vs a knife on the ground.

[Regular Guy]

I'm with you. Its damn hard to explain bjj or martial arts on the interweb. The only way to learn it is to do it. I been doing this for years and I still have a hard time explaining it. Its much easier just to get on the mat.
You're right, I am talking striking to get to grappling if necessary but not mandatory. Again, its not easy for me to clarify with using examples. Sorry about that.

I may be cherrypicking, because I'm scrutinizing the videos you posted. My point remains the same, though. You can't learn BJJ if you don't roll and likewise you can't really learn knife defense without doing the equivalent. Working full speed with a rubber or wooden knife. The sooner you (the royal you) accept you're going to get cut, the sooner you'll be operating within a realistic frame of reference.

And if we're tenderizing, we're really talking about striking.

-Jeff

Jnathan, you've obviously missed a lot of other things I've been saying. Chiefly, that none of the locks, throws disarming techniques work until you've tenderized the subject. Going straight for a kimura against a knife is suicide. You're going to have to use blocks and strikes first then if necessary you can kimura. I'm certainly not saying go straight to your back and try a kimura. However, if you're on your back that techniques works. We just spent hours doing it n class vs a knife on the ground.

[Braxton]

. If you've got someone running at you with a knife from any distance, you are either a LEO who just got the crazy-guy call of his life, or really, really, good at pissing off your ex-wife.

<..... Three time winner. Best knife defense training I ever had. I learned two things,

1. If they have a knife you will get cut. The only question is how bad.

2. Crazy women have chimp strength.

[jnathan]

We are clearly in violent agreement. No need to apologize and I want you to know that no douchebaggery was intended on my part. I appreciate someone with an equally pragmatic approach.

-Jeff

I'm with you. Its damn hard to explain bjj or martial arts on the interweb. The only way to learn it is to do it. I been doing this for years and I still have a hard time explaining it. Its much easier just to get on the mat.
You're right, I am talking striking to get to grappling if necessary but not mandatory. Again, its not easy for me to clarify with using examples. Sorry about that.

[Murph]

Chiefly, that none of the locks, throws disarming techniques work until you've tenderized the subject.

The one thing that worries me about this is that while you're "tenderizing" the attacker, the attacker is working on getting slashes and stabs on you.

Like I aluded to before, (this thread? the other?) I don't want to trade punches for stabs, I don't want to trade bullets for stabs either.

Maybe I'm missing something here though.