Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:


Then why is this such a problem for you? If crime rates are going down why are you so stumped with how to handle these increasing rates of groping and possibly worse soon in your girlfriend's neighborhood? Clearly your laws aren't perfect or this wouldn't be a problem. I think we agree pepper spray should've been allowed to an extent or just some sort of preventative measure. They should have a clue how to handle this effectively rather than shrug their shoulders and say 'I dunno.'

Pardon? I said in the very post you quoted I thought pepper spray should be legal.

I also don't have control over crime rates in specific neighbourhoods, or indeed the general nature of mankind. I'm really not entirely sure what you're getting at here, you seem to be conflating my specific need here with my statement about British cultures approach to weapons generally.

 Ketara wrote:
I believe UKIP says you should be able to legally own a licensed handgun, but that's a bout it.

Judging by your government-sponsored news agency's take, which FYI we hear quite a bit of over here, or can do anyhow, I was not under the impression that UKIP is considered mainstream. One would think that, given how inimical weapons are to the British mindset per your comments, UKIP would perhaps talk more about legalizing pepper spray (rather than going straight to handguns). All I can find with my casual googling is UKIP praising Germans for buying up pepper spray in the wake of the mass sexual assaults at New Year's.

Also, wasp spray are usually designed to shoot a solid stream about 15-20' long.

Perhaps she can take some wine with her or some sort of glass bottle filled with something. If an attacker comes around she can break it or smash it over their face. They can't exactly tell her not to carry a glass bottle filled with a alcohol or something.

 Ketara wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:


Then why is this such a problem for you? If crime rates are going down why are you so stumped with how to handle these increasing rates of groping and possibly worse soon in your girlfriend's neighborhood? Clearly your laws aren't perfect or this wouldn't be a problem. I think we agree pepper spray should've been allowed to an extent or just some sort of preventative measure. They should have a clue how to handle this effectively rather than shrug their shoulders and say 'I dunno.'

Pardon? I said in the very post you quoted I thought pepper spray should be legal.

I also don't have control over crime rates in specific neighbourhoods, or indeed the general nature of mankind. I'm really not entirely sure what you're getting at here, you seem to be conflating my specific need here with my statement about British cultures approach to weapons generally.

I thought this thread was you asking how to overthrow your namby-pamby government, young man!

 Ketara wrote:

 kronk wrote:


Also, tell her to get a cheap bike. She will be a lot more mobile, and muggers/attackers are looking for easy targets. If it gets stolen, so what? It was a cheap bike.

Now THAT is a good suggestion! You don't tend to hear about many people on wheels getting attacked for anything but a bike theft. I'll suggest that to her, definitely.

Thanks, Kronk Kronkington the first

That's another false sense of security. A relative of mine was pulled off her bike and assaulted in broad daylight. Joggers and bikers get attacked all the time in big city parks.

Still, if she rides a bike on a wide, well lit path and pays attention to her surroundings then it is much safer. Just don't think of a bike as unassailable.

One thing to consider with all the legal options being offered.

Is she willing to maim or kill another human and strong enough to do so?

If not, many of the options presented are gonna piss off an attacker and likely get your gal beat senseless. If she uses a Mag light and does not break the attackers wrist right off (assuming he goes to block) or knock him unconscious, he is likely to be in too close for another swing to land with force, and be upset.

Attitude/psychological prep MUST accompany any capability. If she can't commit to destroying another human it may be best not to escalate the attacker's anger and aggression levels.

 Ketara wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:


Then why is this such a problem for you? If crime rates are going down why are you so stumped with how to handle these increasing rates of groping and possibly worse soon in your girlfriend's neighborhood? Clearly your laws aren't perfect or this wouldn't be a problem. I think we agree pepper spray should've been allowed to an extent or just some sort of preventative measure. They should have a clue how to handle this effectively rather than shrug their shoulders and say 'I dunno.'

Pardon? I said in the very post you quoted I thought pepper spray should be legal.

I also don't have control over crime rates in specific neighbourhoods, or indeed the general nature of mankind. I'm really not entirely sure what you're getting at here, you seem to be conflating my specific need here with my statement about British cultures approach to weapons generally.

I know I said we both agreed on it. I'm making a point that your government is a bit too strict. I also am just saying despite the numbers certain crimes might be on the rise whereas others (violent crimes or possibly murders are on the low end).

@kronk: What do you expect? I'm an American. We've wanted to see the UK government get toppled for centuries now and see their queen pushed down some stairs (yes I know that's horrible but I'm kidding). It's long overdue ;P.

Maybe hire Steven Seagal to walk her home at night not sure what he is doing these days.

Manchu wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
I believe UKIP says you should be able to legally own a licensed handgun, but that's a bout it.

Judging by your government-sponsored news agency's take, which FYI we hear quite a bit of over here, or can do anyhow, I was not under the impression that UKIP is considered mainstream. One would think that, given how inimical weapons are to the British mindset per your comments, UKIP would perhaps talk more about legalizing pepper spray (rather than going straight to handguns). All I can find with my casual googling is UKIP praising Germans for buying up pepper spray in the wake of the mass sexual assaults at New Year's.

UKIP are semi-mainstream right now. They took a good chunk of the vote last election, but probably won't in the next. They're something of a spent force.

kronk wrote:
I thought this thread was you asking how to overthrow your namby-pamby government, young man!

Drat. My secret motive is revealed!

BobtheInquisitor wrote:

That's another false sense of security. A relative of mine was pulled off her bike and assaulted in broad daylight. Joggers and bikers get attacked all the time in big city parks.

Still, if she rides a bike on a wide, well lit path and pays attention to her surroundings then it is much safer. Just don't think of a bike as unassailable.

Oh certainly. Nothing short of Abrams makes her completely unassailable.

That being said, most bike assaults are done with the goal of hijacking the bike. And I'd far rather someone nicked a cheap bike and she got a bruise from being pulled off then she's down the station after a sexual assault, y'know? Lesser of two evils and all that.

CptJake wrote:One thing to consider with all the legal options being offered.

Is she willing to maim or kill another human and strong enough to do so?

Probably not unless pushed to do so with no choice. That's why we're discussing ways generally to make an opening in which to escape (lights, a single blow, some kind of spray, etc). I'm not going to recommend she learn Muay Thai to try and beat up a gang of blokes, I'm not that silly.

 CptJake wrote:


Attitude/psychological prep MUST accompany any capability. If she can't commit to destroying another human it may be best not to escalate the attacker's anger and aggression levels.

This probably deserves to be reiterated.

It's another reason why I'd propose Aikido to anyone looking to learn some self defense to protect themselves from harm. Throw someone to the ground right and you have a good chance to run off before they can get back on their feet. Simple as that. Muay Thai is a good example of a fighting art with a ruthless mentality behind it. Lacking that, it is more likely you'll piss someone off than actually hurt them or ensure your own safety.

sell a knife to anyone under 18 (16 to 18 year olds in Scotland can buy cutlery and kitchen knives) unless it’s a knife with a folding blade 3 inches long (7.62 cm) or less, eg a Swiss Army knife
carry a knife in public without good reason - unless it’s a knife with a folding blade 3 inches long (7.62 cm) or less
carry, buy or sell any type of banned knife
use any knife in a threatening way (even a legal knife, such as a Swiss Army knife)

If the rape rate is so high, legally she can easily argue "reason" to carry an offensive weapon, so long as she doesn't use it in a threatening way, I finished my law degree some time ago and haven't kept up to date on current legislation, but this would be considered a "safe case" if it went to court and grounds for legal compensation from the police for not doing enough to curb the problem, as well as damages for stress etc.

I'd suggest speaking with the police before band however and explain the situation, this would put you in good stead legally should it be nessesary.

That which is nessesary is legal, while not an actual law in the UK, is still considered.

I'm starting to think not everyone in the world feels the same as the USA about things. This, obliviously, needs to be corrected.

 Manchu wrote:
One would think that, given how inimical weapons are to the British mindset per your comments, UKIP would perhaps talk more about legalizing pepper spray (rather than going straight to handguns). All I can find with my casual googling is UKIP praising Germans for buying up pepper spray in the wake of the mass sexual assaults at New Year's.

Well...

 judgedoug wrote:
its like all of the people engaging in this thread are playing a game of make-believe, with self-limiting rules. Now gosh how can we get up these stairs? We aren't allowed to use any of our limbs. If you use a limb you might go to jail!

It sadly seems as if they are content to play by the "no limbs" rule even though if they but stand up they could make it up the stairs with no problem.

Asking the police for advice sounds like a good idea to me. They probably have a good idea of what might help.

I don't feel like strategies that involve fighting off half a dozen people at a time are going to be winners. I walk at night from time to time and if a guy is walking the opposite direction there's nothing to tell me if he's going to attack me, especially in the dark. If he chose to, I imagine he would do so when he was close enough that I couldn't react in time.

Also, another thing that comes to mind is you mention the rate of violent crime and sex offenses, but usually those aren't AFAIK committed by strangers. It's entirely possible she is still very safe - though a I say that, if people were getting attacked near where I was walking right now I would think twice about walking there too.

So +1 to asking the local police for advice.

 Ketara wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
Schutzhund trained German Shepard

Whilst thoroughly impractical, I daresay this would be a highly effective legal method. You don't get many women raped whilst walking large guard dogs!

Yes, it is most definitely a solution but sadly it sounds like it's not one you can use. But big dogs certainly do the trick

A knife or weapon does you zero good if you don't know how to break a physical hold of someone stronger than you.

That is why most self defense is about how to break a hold and disengage, not escalate via using a weapon. There are techniques which can break holds and disengage regardless if size/weight/power and require no weapons.

Also, when you commit to carrying and using a weapon, you have to be prepared to face the consequences when you use force pre-preemptive or inappropriately. I was maced once at a toys R us during Christmas because some lady thought I was following her to her car when I wasn't. If I didn't have a witness who saw me not even close to her and doing nothing to her, she could have said 'he attacked me'. She sought me out and sprayed me out of preemptive fear. I pressed charges but if I didn't have a witness, I probably would have been in jail with a record now.

Physical unarmed self defense and how to disengage and escape is your best bet. Arming yourself, especially if you don't have the training to overcome fear or 'fight/flight' mechanisms will only escalate a bad situation.

I suggest self-defence classes, and carrying a rape alarm and one of those sprays that shoots off indelible paint.

Obviously it is also a good idea to be streetwise in general.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I suggest self-defence classes, and carrying a rape alarm and one of those sprays that shoots off indelible paint.

Obviously it is also a good idea to be streetwise in general.

Rape alarms are sadly quite useless, statistics have shown people are very likely to intervene unless they have direct line of sight to the attack, you are better off shouting fire.

I'm currently looking into the legality of carrying flick sticks, as these seem to be a grey area in the UK.

A cane like item? probably not unless you are handy capable.
If anything you could use a telescopic selfy cam for the same effect i think.

id say the safest thing to do is go in groups.

just having another person should deter at least lone assailant imho.

Hearing that pepper spray is illegal surprises me. I think it's legal here and I do not feel overly threatened even at night.

 RiTides wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
Schutzhund trained German Shepard

Whilst thoroughly impractical, I daresay this would be a highly effective legal method. You don't get many women raped whilst walking large guard dogs!

Yes, it is most definitely a solution but sadly it sounds like it's not one you can use. But big dogs certainly do the trick

My wife lived in the east side of Youngstown, Ohio by herself before we got married. She has a German Shepard that is well trained and would take the dogs for walks in the evening. Dog knows how to bark and growl on command. When she would walk the dog people would cross the street so they didn't have to walk near the dog. Thankfully she never had a problem

High heels shoes. Especially, stiletto types. That heel can put one heck of a puncture wound when used. Hold the inner heel in the palm of the hand, and "slap" someone with it.

In all seriousness, have her take self defense classes, EVERYTHING within reach is a potential weapon, the rock, the tree, the gravel, your pen, and even the droid can be used to defend oneself with the proper training.

Rather than all this stuff that will probably either do nothing, make the situation worse or get her a criminal record, how about seeing if the university have a safty bus? Most do.

Also, remember that she is more likely to die in a car crash taking a taxi than be raped or killed walking home.

 Manchu wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
As far as I'm aware, there's absolutely no mainstream political party that champions that sort of agenda.

I mean, that just seems incomprehensible. Here we are having a discussion because your lady friend justifiably fears being sexually assaulted to the point of wanting to obtain, let's be honest here, a weapon to defend herself but faces the problem of carrying whatever might be considered a weapon, even in the context of self-defense, being illegal. And you're telling me that there is nobody credible over there who can take up this issue as a matter of politics? It's an absolute paradox from my perspective.

I never get why folk struggle with this. We don't see emulating criminals as the way to reduce crime. The more people are walking around armed, in whatever way, the more you're going to end up with situations where folk end up maimed or dead that didn't need to be. It's callous, but at the end of the day from a utilitarian perspective you have to weigh the harm caused by a small number of assaults going ahead unimpeded which would have been stopped had the victim been armed, against the harm caused if many assaults which aren't so one-sided become much more serious because one or more people involved are toting knives and batons, as well as all the other scenarios where an armed populace could exacerbate or create harm.

You know what happens when it's legal to walk around with weapons, in our experience? You go from only hardened criminals carrying to all criminals, then just thuggish and antisocial people generally, then normal folk feel the need to get weapons to "protect themselves", then it becomes normal so kids and teens start doing it - then you've got kids stabbing each other over someone nicking their last ciggy or snogging their girlfriend, bouncers getting stabbed by low-level drug dealers they caught who didn't want to get taken in by the police, street brawls that end with brain damage because some genius pulled out the police baton they bought off ebay, etc etc etc. Then of course the logical thing to do is arm the police with guns so they can keep order, which means of course the criminals get guns, then thugs, etc etc, and oh look we're America, what time's the next school massacre?

I know that's a touch flippant, and at first glance looks very slippery and slightly sloped, but our laws came from experience every bit as much as yours did.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
As far as I'm aware, there's absolutely no mainstream political party that champions that sort of agenda.

I mean, that just seems incomprehensible. Here we are having a discussion because your lady friend justifiably fears being sexually assaulted to the point of wanting to obtain, let's be honest here, a weapon to defend herself but faces the problem of carrying whatever might be considered a weapon, even in the context of self-defense, being illegal. And you're telling me that there is nobody credible over there who can take up this issue as a matter of politics? It's an absolute paradox from my perspective.

I never get why folk struggle with this. We don't see emulating criminals as the way to reduce crime. The more people are walking around armed, in whatever way, the more you're going to end up with situations where folk end up maimed or dead that didn't need to be. It's callous, but at the end of the day from a utilitarian perspective you have to weigh the harm caused by a small number of assaults going ahead unimpeded which would have been stopped had the victim been armed, against the harm caused if many assaults which aren't so one-sided become much more serious because one or more people involved are toting knives and batons, as well as all the other scenarios where an armed populace could exacerbate or create harm.

You know what happens when it's legal to walk around with weapons, in our experience? You go from only hardened criminals carrying to all criminals, then just thuggish and antisocial people generally, then normal folk feel the need to get weapons to "protect themselves", then it becomes normal so kids and teens start doing it - then you've got kids stabbing each other over someone nicking their last ciggy or snogging their girlfriend, bouncers getting stabbed by low-level drug dealers they caught who didn't want to get taken in by the police, street brawls that end with brain damage because some genius pulled out the police baton they bought off ebay, etc etc etc. Then of course the logical thing to do is arm the police with guns so they can keep order, which means of course the criminals get guns, then thugs, etc etc, and oh look we're America, what time's the next school massacre?

I know that's a touch flippant, and at first glance looks very slippery and slightly sloped, but our laws came from experience every bit as much as yours did.

So you already associate self defense with being a criminal act. I understand why you dont want guns or knives or what not as they are for the most part dangerous and have a crazy spectrum of culture attached. but what of pepper spray and the likes of non lethal types.

That kind of sounds like "Just take one for the team."

 Desubot wrote:


So you already associate self defense with being a criminal act. I understand why you dont want guns or knives or what not as they are for the most part dangerous and have a crazy spectrum of culture attached. but what of pepper spray and the likes of non lethal types.

Because pepper spray escalates and doesn't incapacitate, where physical self defense de-escalates and escapes and is more effective at incapacitating than non-lethal devices.

Also, the self-defense training actually prepares you for fight or flight, where having any form of weapon, without training doesn't help you and puts you more at-risk and helps escallate as you have now potentially provided an unarmed assailant a weapon to use on you due to your unprepared training.

Knowing how to break a grip on your wrist, how to cause sharp pain to break a hold, how to run and actually having done it under live scenarios with practice is far superior and will make you safer over carrying mace or a knife.

pgmason wrote:
A good solid torch like a maglite is probably the best bet if she really wants something that can be used as a weapon if need be but isn't likely to get her arrested. She should definitely also carry a rape alarm though.

She doesn't necessarily need to incapacitate an attacker - just make them decide it's not worth the bother.

6 cell maglites are considered suspect by the police. The only people who 'should' have one are police. You will notice you can only easily get 4 cells maglites or less. It is not illegal to have a bigger one and it is a great self defence tool. Not only as a club, slime it in someones face, ruins their night vision and enables her to evade them. It also shines through bushes not into them, so it uncovers lurkers.

 Desubot wrote:


So you already associate self defense with being a criminal act. I understand why you dont want guns or knives or what not as they are for the most part dangerous and have a crazy spectrum of culture attached. but what of pepper spray and the likes of non lethal types.

I provided two links earlier of people being attacked by thugs with pepper spray. The problem with weapons of any kind is that it doesn't discriminate against who's pressing the weapon, a girl fighting off a rapist, or a racist hooligan who just spotted a 'Paki' and 'wants a laff'. If you can't buy pepper spray, you can't use it. Sure, it raises the odds of the girl getting raped. But it also raises the odds of that other chap walking away without screaming and clawing at his eyes.

This applies for any weapon, be it knives, guns, telescoping batons, flamethrowers, or tanks.

Different societies set the bar at different levels. In America, everyone and their mums is packing. The result is that firearm incidents are not uncommon, whilst here, they're frontpage news because they're so rare. The flip side of the coin, Britain, has stringent weaponry laws which means you have very little in the way of self-defence. But that means that the worst weapon I've ever seen pulled in a street fight is cheap Chinese knuckleduster. I know that the inner London gang violence is a little worse, but generally speaking, weapons aren't the norm. As a result, weapon inflicted injuries are not the norm either.

I personally think pepper spray should be legal. I believe it has the potential to help more women then it saves victims in that regard, and that the kind of people who would use pepper spray as an offensive weapon are just as likely to brain someone with a brick. I doubt they'll cease to be vicious just because they don't have it. But I'd draw the line at tasers, for example, I don't believe those should be legal.