Part
1:
The Criminal Mind by Peyton Quinn
This Article is from Peyton Quinn's Website: Rocky Mountain Combat Applications Training
Peyton Quinn: The Criminal Mind Parts 1 & 2
Part
1:
Despite the intensity of the armored assailant fight
scenarios at our RMCAT Training Center, our instruction is not
limited to how to punch, kick or throw. In order to truly
teach self defense in today’s world I strongly feel that no
self defense program can limit it’s instruction to physical
technique skills alone.
This is why I have interviewed scores of convicted killers,
muggers, rapists, armed robbers and drug pushers over the last
few years. We use this information at RMCAT in designing some
elements of our self-defense program. Please consider that it
is these criminals that are the ones that commit most of the
criminal assaults and these are thus the people whose thought
process you need to know something about. Armed with that
knowledge you have a far better chance to avoid them and to
physically defend yourself from them too. The criminal mind
does not operate quite like that of the decent and socialized
people that you work out with in the dojo.
At RMCAT we recently finished editing a videotape (Real
Criminals, Real Crimes) of these convict interviews with a
small group of convicted felons some of whom were multiple
killers too. Perhaps the first thing I should mention here is
that all these interviews took place out of prison as even
most murderers eventually are returned to the streets.
Now, having said that the criminal predator’s mind does not
work just quite like yours or mine, let me also point out a
significant qualification here too. When I worked as bouncer I
saw a commonality in thinking between the people who bullied
and punched out others in the barroom and the grade school and
high school bullies I had dealt with in my school-boy years.
Understanding the modus operandi of these barroom thugs in my
work as a bouncer had ultimately allowed me to avoid most of
them in the first place. Yet, I still got many of them to
behave as required and without the use of violence. Later in
life when I began interviewing the convicts I saw this
continuum of behavioral thinking again. Indeed, I would say
that if a person was too successful as a schoolyard bully then
he sometimes continued and escalated this behavior until he
succeeded in ending up in prison.
Finally, especially looking back on my experience in the
business world with a software development company that I
co-founded in the 80’s (hindsight is often 20/20) I was
forced to see that it was mainly the intensity, cruelty and
consequences of predator like thinking that differentiated
some of the things I dealt with in the boardroom with what I
had dealt with in the barroom. It was clear to me that these
behavioral mechanics of predatory thinking were simply greatly
distilled and amplified in the crucible of the prisons.
My point here is that understanding these predatory thought
patterns has application and utility for you far beyond
physical self-defense against the criminal element. Knowledge
is indeed power. On the street or perhaps even at the office,
if you act like a victim you will likely to be treated like
one. We will be looking more specifically at what these
convicts told me that they looked for in selecting a victim
and also what they might see that would make them pass on
someone as a suitable victim too. But I will have to save that
for part two of this article. I want to close this installment
with a story about a RMCAT student who is a fairly young,
slightly built and somewhat passive Chinese American living in
Brooklyn.
He wrote to me explaining that for the last three years he had
been hospitalized about every 4 to 6 months from racially
motivated street assaults. These attacks had left him with
some permanent disabilities too. Perhaps needless to say my
first advice to him was to move into another neighborhood. He
was a very meek individual when I first meet him. He walked
with his head down, he would seldom make any eye contact with
you and his voice was so low I had to ask him to speak up so I
could understand him. But, I saw all this greatly improve over
the course of the weekend’s training. His physical fighting
skill was still relatively pitiful at that point though.
After he left the training he wrote and emailed me regularly.
He was amazed to see that he had now gone a whole year without
being attacked and hospitalized! He had a few close calls but
by asserting himself a bit he had avoided them from going to
physical assaults. To me it was very apparent why things had
changed for him. Through his understanding of the predatory
and bully mind he had learned how to not to look like such an
attractive victim. Next month we will examine how to do that
and how predators think in more detail. Stay alert and stay
safe,
Peyton Quinn
Part 2:
In Part One of this article we pointed out that a potential
criminal assailant will be far more likely to attack someone
when they have a passive victim. We presented the example of a
young man who seldom made eye contact with anyone, who spoke
in a very low voice and who shuffled his feet as he walked
with his head down. Being smaller than average and a racial
minority in an ethnic neighborhood he had been assaulted many
times by bullies and he was hospitalized from these attacks.
After a weekend of scenario based training at RMCAT he
improved significantly and this made him a less attractive
victim. He then went the longest period in his life without of
being attacked after this training. Now realize, he still
could not really fight effectively, he had just became more
"assertive" and he showed less obvious fear when
confronted. This man is a fairly extreme example of the fact
that how we deport ourselves can determine if we are selected
for assault. Once again, the criminal is looking for a victim
and not a fight.
We interviewed a number of convicted felons (whose crimes
ranged from forcible rape to murder and armed robbery) and
asked them what they looked for in selecting a victim. We also
asked them what behavior they might observe that would
discourage them from selecting a person as a victim. Though
greatly compressed here is the essence of what they told us.
Most of them would make some sort of intelligence gathering
effort to see what the state of mind was of their potential
victim. In my first book I referred to this as the
"Interview". For the bully types this would most
often consist of some sort of verbal abuse or challenge. An
example might be a very surly "What are you doing
here?" or "What are you looking at?" Of course
their language would be more profane and colorful than what we
choose to print here.
These predators would then see if their candidate for assault
showed (1) denial, that is if they pretended not see or hear
the threat and simply ignored it, perhaps hoping it would just
go away ? and /or (2) Did they display other obvious signs of
fear like not making any eye contact at all, or if they
replied verbally did their voice betray their fear and
uncertainty?. Indeed, their initial selection of victim
potential even before this active interview stage was made
among those who initially showed the more passive behavior.
Among the armed robbers we would hear thing like this: (1)
"Well if before I even get into the store the clerk
behind the counter sees me and makes eye contact, then I’m
out of there" or (2) "I’ll ask him some irrelevant
question like ‘Do you have this kind of beer?’ even though
I see it right their in the cooler. His voice tells me if
he’s scared or if maybe he already knows what’s up and
he’s prepared to deal with it, or (3) If the guy stays
behind one certain area of the counter, like he may have a gun
there or maybe even in his hand already behind that counter,
well then I’m gone. I’m not there to wrestle over no gun
or to fight, I’m just there for the money and if I can’t
get it easy there then I’ll just go down the road where I
can".
Armed robbers differ in some ways from bully types. The armed
robbers are more business like and also often more easily
deterred than just "bullies". The bully just wants
to make himself feel better by beating and humiliating another
person, but for the most part they still look for passive game
and they do not want a fighting contest of any kind.
As one person told us " …so I have him down on the
ground and I make him say stuff to me like I’m sorry’ or
‘Uncle’ or something like that? It shows that I’m not
such a ‘loser’, if I can control this guy, …that at
least I’m better than him, I want to degrade him and that
makes me look better to the other people in the bar or
whatever"
Hence, we see that they are both looking for easy prey in
either case, be it the armed robbery or the bully who attacks
others in the bar or even in a street setting. Let me add,
this is basically always the case with forcible rapists too.
Rapist will very seldom choose a woman who walks with an
assertive posture and who appears to be very alert.
But does this mean that we should try to act "tough"
around such people? No, it certainly does not in my
estimation. For one thing it is most often a real mistake to
be provoking or challenging to this cretins. We must therefore
clearly recognize the difference between being assertive and
being aggressive or challenging.
The predator is very much aware that he can become prey too.
This creates an exaggerated sense or an extreme need in him to
be feared and to not be disrespected or "dissed".
One convict we interviewed talked about jumping over the
counter at a McDonalds to attack a cook who simply refused to
re-scramble his eggs the way he wanted. In his
criminal/predator mind this was being "dissed" and
so it had to be dealt with immediately. So how do you think
that predator might respond if you coldly told him ,"just
get lost dirt bag!"
Yes, some can be scared off by such a display of
"bravado", but this is most often tactically foolish
to gamble on. It is also just not necessary either. One would
do better by loudly and with some assertive projection demand
that him to "Back off man! Just back off!" You might
not see how different these two approaches are, but to the
predator’s mind they are "night and day".
"Back off!" most often is interpreted as "Just
let me be, I am prepared to fight if need be but it does not
have to go there". This way the aggressor has an
honorable exit and is not being directly "dissed".
But if you say, "get lost dirt bag!" or anything
along those lines, to him this means " Your just trash
and not a man so I don’t have to worry about you. You’re
afraid or incapable of really backing up your threat and so I
can scare you off with just a few barks".
Be assertive, not confrontational or even disrespectful. Make
eye contact but do not try to "stare him down" in
any way. Let him see that you are very much aware of him and
his intentions and what is happening around you. Project your
verbal boundary strongly, loudly and very assertively.
Of course sometimes it will take more than this to defend
yourself, but even these harden convicts told us that such
actions will sometimes motivate them to find more
"passive game".
Peyton Quinn
Visit Peyton's Website: