Often When You Try To Teach Someone A Lesson, You're
The One Who Ends Up Getting Schooled

******************************************************
"It's all fun and games 'til someone loses an eye"

- Mom
******************************************************

I was meeting with one of my master instructors and
some business associates the other day. We were
hashing out the schedule for the coming year and
elaborating on the requirements for the new TFT
Mastery Program. This program allows clients the
ability to expand their skills, even achieving the
status of Trainer (a level of fighting education
unavailable until now).

One of our associates had difficulty comprehending
our clear-cut definition of when to use violence as
the solution to a dangerous problem. For us it's
simple, the situation needs to be criminal in nature
and "life-or-death serious", meaning... if you don't
take action you are going to be harmed.

This associate kept bringing up various social
situations where someone is verbally (even mildly
physically) aggressive but where the physical threat
is unclear. In other words, at this point you'd be
hard pressed to fight for any reason other than to
"teach him a lesson".

I was just about to handle this issue when my master
instructor jumped in and gave a great example of the
dangers of "teaching someone a lesson".

Seems his older brother (while not at the trainer
level, still an excellent fighter) had a roommate who
caused numerous problems for the other 3 in his house.
Apparently the problem child (we'll call him 'Joe')
was a large person, and both verbally and physically
aggressive. The other roommates had nominated my
instructor's brother (lets call him 'Tom') to give
'Joe' his walking papers.

Although *much* smaller than 'Joe', 'Tom' was
confident that with his extensive fighting training he
could easily handle the situation.

As 'Tom' explained to 'Joe' that he needed to move
out, 'Joe's reaction was to get verbally combative and
use his larger frame as an intimidation factor.

As he moved closer, 'Tom' felt it was time to let
him know he wasn't intimidated and met him with a knee
to the groin and a short punch to the jaw. 'Joe'
doubled over and moved away from the strikes but he
was still standing because 'Tom' hadn't followed up
his strikes since he was only half-heartedly "teaching
him a lesson".

What happened next was a nightmare.

Wondering if 'Joe' was all right 'Tom' moved closer
but 'Joe', now in a violent rage, charged and knocked
him viciously to the floor, then jumped over his body
and began repeatedly kicking him in the temple with
his heavy work boots.

The end result: 'Joe' was arrested and 'Tom'
required numerous MRI's just to insure he had no
lasting brain damage.

Now whenever they instruct class, both my master
trainer and his brother use this as a perfect example
of why, in a violent threat, there can only be one
response... and it's never an attempt to "teach
someone a lesson" or simply an ego boost.

If you are not prepared to leave the other guy in a
non-functioning state, you are not committed to fight.
You're just playing with social violence. But in a
truly violent situation, the other guy IS going to be
committed to *really* hurting you.

In this case 'Tom' used violence to "teach a lesson"
and 'Joe' responded with a lethal attack. You can
never know a person's response to violence. If you use
it to "teach a lesson" (i.e., treat violence as a
game) you may very well find yourself missing an
eye... just like Mom said!

Until next time,

Tim Larkin
Creator of Target-Focus(TM) Training
http://www.targetfocustraining.com

PS. My 'Nuclear' Weapons video series clearly defines
all Target-Focus Training system principles. Read more
about it at: http://www.targetfocusweapons.com

PPS. Discover more about protecting yourself and your loved
ones using Target-Focus Training system principles by
going to: http://www.targetfocustraining.com/products