best way to knock someone out

[teh_cheat]

Originally Posted by fightforcash

1 word rohypnol lol but in all seriousness its pretty effective ask my victims lol

Ahaha, Just before your about to fight them, ask them if they want to settle your differences over a pint, slip a couple in the drink then punch em to the floor, on the plus side they wont remember who did it.

But in all seriousness rohypnol is not really an option.

[fightforcash]

Originally Posted by teh_cheat

Ahaha, Just before your about to fight them, ask them if they want to settle your differences over a pint, slip a couple in the drink then punch em to the floor, on the plus side they wont remember who did it.

But in all seriousness rohypnol is not really an option.

well never mind I do't use it in fights. bars and clubs are more my style lol

[Z0mb13Killer]

bloodlusta clapping someones ears can kill them because it causes internal bleeding and stamping their temple can also kill them

[bloodlusta]

Im well aware of that. Knocking someone is caused by damaging the brain (either through lack of oxygen or shock) that the nerves overload and the brain shuts down. So knocking someone out will always run the risk of killing them if it done with to much force. The trick is judging how much force is needed. You can kill someone by punching them in the chin hard enough

[MrBlonde]

Hit them square on the chin. Or on the side of it - but then you risk breaking the jaw.

If you just want to knock them out without inflicting serious injury, suuare on the chin is your best bet. If you pad your hand with cloth or something else it will also help reduce the impact to your hand.

[bloodlusta]

Originally Posted by MrBlonde

If you just want to knock them out without inflicting serious injury.

Explan how this works to me. You want to damage a persons brain without causing serious injury?

Last week we did knock out holds on people for HTHC. So afterwards some other requrits though it would be funny to do this on their mates. They are on mark for doing that because ever time you do a choke hold on someone you are seriously damaging their brain. DON'T DO IT FOR SHITS AND GIGGLES

[Misanthropy]

Chloroform is a joke for the movies. I've made it several times & used it on myself nearly as many. I'm not envious of the asshat that tries to slap a rag over my face...

Propofol perhaps. It's obtainable.

[bloodlusta]

I would never trust chemicals for that kind of thing. Everyone reacts differantly. My grandad go hit in the arm in Crete and the meds gave him morphen and he still wouldn't pass out.

Also you don't know if they could react badly to it (or not at all)

[Draven]

Options:
1. Hit them with a hammer or other hard object in the Temple or just above the hair line center of the skull preferably after thay have been tazed...
2. Palm heel strike to the Chin, Double Earslap, Palm strike to the Base of the Skull, Extended Knuckle hooked to the Temple or Elbow Thrust to the Temple and if it doesn't knock them out go with the stomping of the temples, base of the skull & ears.

Always remember if you ever find yourself in a fair fight, you need to re-examine your tactics...

[bloodlusta]

Army knock out method.

Soild kick to the nuts as they go down hold head and elbow strike about the ear follow by repeated punchs to the temple.

One thing I has always stressed on here. A fight is not like it is on tv where the hero does one clean strike to the weak point and they go down. You have to keep brutally hitting that weak point till they down. So keep hitting their temple and kicking them in the nuts till they pass out.

The purpose of the elbow is not to knock out but to stun and disorinate so you can take them out with the following blows, but if it does knock them out with one hit all the better. The reason you use punchs rather than more elbow strikes it because it is very hard to reset for another elbow strike after you have done one.

[spunone69]

Just get a 900,000 volt stun gun...it might not knock them out, but it will knock them down!! Once they're down, crack 'em on the skull with something HEAVY!!

[Misanthropy]

Stun guns have never done anything to me but irritate me. They stun mostly the senses/attention, not the body.

They're not at all like a taser. Superficial muscle contractions don't usually do anything to anyone but piss them off. Stun guns are one of the worlds most over hyped novelties.

Well, if a stealth method of disabling someone is needed, most any of the induction class drugs will work. Ultra fine (27-30 g hypo) in the ass cheek at a club with a premeasured dose of whatever will be effective in a mostly covert manner. You may kill them also however as you run the risk of paralyzing their diaphragm.

Otherwise, why can't you just bust them in the head with a sap?

[bloodlusta]

Stun gun meaning what?

Stun gun simply referees to any weapon that stuns someone for a short time. I shot gun with 'rubber bullets' can be called a stun gun. If you are referring to tazer weapons (police standard) then saying they irritated you is just stupid. Admittedly there are some people who have enough control to swipe the probes out while being shocked but the people have to be prepared for it. It depends where you are hit as well. For example being hit in the ribs has less affect that a thigh or upper chest shot. Also the larger your muscles are the greater affect it will have on you.

[Misanthropy]

"Stun gun" is a nearly universally accepted term for a hand held, non penetrative, high voltage, low current, voltage multiplier device with contact probes on it for topical use.

Not nearly the same as a taser & you know this so don't try to get diversionary with me.

Are you illiterate also? I quite clearly differentiated between tasers & stun guns.

As far as muscle groups go.... there's some room to argue this.. In terms of a "stun gun", not so much with a taser due to surface penetration & lowered tissue resistance.

A "stun gun" works more efficiently across a smaller muscle group as there's less resistance over all & less musculature to override.

I have less control over my forearm when I apply my cattle prod to it than I do my thigh when testing in the same way. There's more unaffected muscle in the larger muscle group also... So, take it how you like.

Tasers weren't the question, stun guns were, in the sense that I was referring to. You know this, let's please quit trying to obfuscate the issue.

[bloodlusta]

Here in NZ a stun gun means a tazer. We don't have any other form of electrail stunning device, you said not a tazer I wasn't sure if you mean the brand or the probe firing hand gun model.

Could you please post an example of what the stun gun you are refuring to is?

[shetlan]

Originally Posted by bloodlusta

Here in NZ a stun gun means a tazer. We don't have any other form of electrail stunning device, you said not a tazer I wasn't sure if you mean the brand or the probe firing hand gun model.

Could you please post an example of what the stun gun you are refuring to is?

All Tasers are Stun Guns but not all Stun Guns are Tasers.

Visible differences: A Taser fires projectiles on wires to shock an assailant; a Stun Gun doesn't.

Performance Differences: A Taser delivers 50K volts of continuous current, whereas a Stun Gun delivers 100K-2Mil volts in a short burst. A Taser also has a higher amperage than a typical Stun Gun.

PS> Aren't rubber bullets fun - they hurt like hell, but it's a strange experience to get shot a bunch of times an live.

[bloodlusta]

Are stun guns those things you sometimes see on tv where the woman is being mugged and whips out what looks like a flash light (for lack of a better word) and presses it agaist the guy and shocks him?

[Misanthropy]

Google & wikipedia can answer these questions with less typing.

[shetlan]

Originally Posted by bloodlusta

Are stun guns those things you sometimes see on tv where the woman is being mugged and whips out what looks like a flash light (for lack of a better word) and presses it agaist the guy and shocks him?

That would qualify as a stun gun - and it wouldn't qualify as a tazer.

STUN GUN


TASER

[Misanthropy]

DMSO application of several small structure compounds is also told to work. I've never tested this but it would stand to reason.

[bloodlusta]

Originally Posted by shetlan

That would qualify as a stun gun - and it wouldn't qualify as a tazer.

STUN GUN


TASER

Ah thank you.

[Skelton]

I'd like to see Misanthropy get hit with all three round of the new tazer.
But to knock someone out the matchbox punch is probably effective, just not as effective as stated. However it will probably hurt your wrist too.

[blank stare]

getting hit in the back of the head usually puts people out. It might even cause temporary memory loss.

[ninefingers]

Originally Posted by shetlan

Performance Differences: A Taser delivers 50K volts of continuous current, whereas a Stun Gun delivers 100K-2Mil volts in a short burst. A Taser also has a higher amperage than a typical Stun Gun.

You mean :"delivers 50kV with continuous current capability"; "a Stun Gun delivers 100kV-2 MegaVolts"..."A Taser also has a higher current delivery"; not has higher amperage. Amperage is the current flow. If no load, no current.

EDIT: Re: Use of Chloroform: I made some--the stuff does Not work like in the movies! Euthanasia took about 60 seconds, as one post reported. And, it Stinks! No person is going to stand still while this stuff that smells somewhere between bleach and Sulfuric acid is held over your nose!

[STS-103]

Belgian Takedown. Worked before for me, and is easy.

[shetlan]

Originally Posted by STS-103

Belgian Takedown. Worked before for me, and is easy.

Strong advisory against the Belgian Takedown. You leave your target far too much time to scream and there's absolutely no guarantee that hitting the ground will knock him out - hence it's removal from many CQB manuals in the 90's on.

[STS-103]

Originally Posted by shetlan

Strong advisory against the Belgian Takedown. You leave your target far too much time to scream and there's absolutely no guarantee that hitting the ground will knock him out - hence it's removal from many CQB manuals in the 90's on.

If you simply put them to the ground, no, the shock will take a few seconds to wear off unless they are highly alert, and prepared for that attack. But if you put them to the ground and then finish them, with a bit of practice it can be done quietly. The reason it was removed is that if done improperly, it will break the sentries neck, and the army was looking into quiet, nonlethal removals.

The overall best knockout blow would be a chinjab. Pure and simple.

Killing someone quietly is a bit easier then knocking them out.,

[shetlan]

Originally Posted by STS-103

If you simply put them to the ground, no, the shock will take a few seconds to wear off unless they are highly alert, and prepared for that attack.

It's a natural reflex to scream when one is falling - that should be obvious.

Originally Posted by STS-103

But if you put them to the ground and then finish them, with a bit of practice it can be done quietly.

Unless of course their reflexs tell them to put out their hands to stop the fall, which they likely will - making the entire exercise pointless.

Originally Posted by STS-103

The reason it was removed is that if done improperly, it will break the sentries neck, and the army was looking into quiet, nonlethal removals.

1: The Army doesn't remove anything because it "kills too well".

2: The Belgian Takedown wouldn't fit that description in one's wildest dreams.

3: It was also removed from the Marine CQB manual, the Navy combat manual, and the hand to hand combat manuals of most of the world's other military forces.

It was removed because it's ineffective, not because it's "too deadly"

Originally Posted by STS-103

The overall best knockout blow would be a chinjab. Pure and simple.

Killing someone quietly is a bit easier then knocking them out.,

The best knockout blow is a simultaneous strike to the throat and the base of the skull - dealt from behind. Instant, silent, and allows for quiet removal of the unconscious person.

[STS-103]

Actually, if something kills too well in training, it can be removed. I shit you not; most of the things I learned have come from service members, other bits from other people. If you could post your sources, that would be helpful

Putting the hands up to break the fall is useless, on the most basic level of the movement, if you truly understand combatives, you can easily and instinctively follow it up.

Hitting the base of the skull (medulla oblangata) and throat (possibly larynx, which if it, will swell and kill the victim) are two dangerous targets that easily harm the person in question if not executed perfectly, whereas a chinjab, hitting straight on, will rattle the brain.

Edit: I just asked a fucking 18D30; it's total bullshit that a sentry would scream when falling, and he said that's not why they fazed out the Belgian Takedown.

[shetlan]

Wow, I don't know whether to call this ignorance or stupidity.

Originally Posted by STS-103

Actually, if something kills too well in training, it can be removed.

Training that can cause death from concussive force, falls, or improper landing takes place on padded mats to prevent such things.

Thank you, you've now cemented in the fact that you're absolutely full of shit.

Originally Posted by STS-103

Putting the hands up to break the fall is useless, on the most basic level of the movement, if you truly understand combatives, you can easily and instinctively follow it up.

Well, your assumption that breaking the fall is useless proves only that you've never tried it - by which I mean the move itself not attempting to break your fall.

You seem to be under the impression that your opponent isn't going to fight back or struggle at all - which is yet another reason why this technique is completely useless.

Originally Posted by STS-103

Hitting the base of the skull (medulla oblangata) and throat (possibly larynx, which if it, will swell and kill the victim) are two dangerous targets that easily harm the person in question if not executed perfectly, whereas a chinjab, hitting straight on, will rattle the brain.

So, let me see if I understand thus far.
You claim that the Belgian Takedown was "too deadly" and was subsequently removed from military training.
None the less, you recommend it anyway.

That in mind, you claim that a strike to the base of the skull and throat is "too deadly" and hence can't be recommended.

In any case, the stike to the base of the skull and throat doesn't necessarally kill. A lighter touch is used for a knockout and a heavier strike for a kill.

Originally Posted by STS-103

Edit: I just asked a fucking 18D30; it's total bullshit that a sentry would scream when falling, and he said that's not why they fazed out the Belgian Takedown.

Nice to see you have an imaginary friend to keep you company. I assume it's the same imaginary friend that told you to make shaped charges out of coffee cans.