Knife and firearm defence: a professional perspective - By Sensei Liam Musiak

As an instructor who trains regularly and develops practical self-defence curricula, I take a clear, evidence-based view on weapons-based attacks. The cinematic “disarm” — the polished technique often shown in films and online clips — is not a reliable primary strategy in real life. Close-quarters encounters with knives or firearms are highly variable and unforgiving: small mistakes can have catastrophic consequences. For that reason my teaching focuses on survivability, simplicity and sound decision-making rather than theatrical moves.

Prioritise avoidance and escape

The most effective defensive measures are preventive. If it is possible to avoid a confrontation or to withdraw safely, do so. Personal items such as phones, wallets and watches can be replaced; lives cannot. Giving an assailant what they want is an entirely rational option when you reasonably believe it will keep you safe. However, avoidance is not always possible: attacks can be sudden, from behind, or otherwise unavoidable. In those situations other options are necessary.

Accept uncertainty — prepare for it

Realistic training recognises the role of chance. A technique that succeeds in one context may fail in another because of lighting, terrain, bystanders, stress or simple bad luck. Training reduces risk but cannot eliminate it. Knowing something about how to respond — even a small body of practical skills — materially increases the likelihood of survival compared with having no training at all.

Simple, reliable actions over complex disarms

When an attack cannot be avoided, the priority is to neutralise the immediate threat as quickly and safely as possible. From a practical standpoint that usually means controlling the limb that holds the weapon. Dominating the weapon-bearing arm reduces the primary danger and creates an opportunity to move off the line of attack. From that position, decisive movement away from the threat and immediate, purposeful strikes or escapes are far more reliable than attempting intricate disarms that require perfect timing or conditions.

For firearms this means moving off the line of fire and using controlled, aggressive action to create an opening; for knives it means securing or immobilising the weapon-bearing limb and gaining offline space to strike or disengage. The sequence I teach is straightforward: control the limb, get off the line, and apply decisive action. These are principles that are trainable, repeatable under stress, and transferrable across different scenarios.

Luck and uncertainty

Avoid at all costs — and run if you can. That remains the single most important rule. If you can remove yourself from danger, do so immediately; nothing you own is worth risking your life for. However, when avoidance and escape are not possible, you must accept that luck plays a major role in any weapons encounter.

No matter how well trained you are, variables outside your control — an attacker’s unpredictable reaction, the initial angle of a blade or bullet, poor lighting, uneven footing, bystanders, or a tiny timing error — can change an outcome in an instant. Training reduces the influence of chance by increasing the probability in your favour, but it cannot eliminate randomness altogether. Teaching honest expectations about that uncertainty is essential: students who understand the role of chance make better tactical choices, prioritise escape when it is available, and avoid overconfidence in any single technique.

This recognition should shape instruction. Rather than promising guarantees, training should prioritise principles that remain useful across chaotic environments: dominant control of the weapon-bearing limb, getting off the line of attack, creating and exploiting distance, and immediate decisive action. These low-variable, high-yield behaviours increase the likelihood that a favourable piece of chance — a stumble from the attacker, a brief opening, or a successful strike — can be exploited. Psychologically, being candid about uncertainty reduces reckless risk-taking and encourages sensible decision-making under pressure.

Why training matters (and why not training is worse)

Avoidance first. Run if you can. But if you cannot run and you are forced to fight, knowing nothing is effectively a 100% death sentence — or at best it dramatically increases the chance of catastrophic injury. That blunt fact is why preparation matters.

Some clubs decline to teach weapon-specific responses because survival odds in certain scenarios are poor and the legal/ethical landscape is complex. Those are legitimate concerns, but choosing not to teach is still a decision with consequences: it leaves students with no options. By contrast, even modest, evidence-based training can materially improve outcomes. Being able to control a weapon-bearing limb for a second, move off the line of attack, create distance, or deliver one decisive strike are all discrete actions that meaningfully change the mathematics of a violent encounter.

Training focused on survivability should be:

1. Clear about priorities: avoidance and escape are primary. If escape is not possible, controlling the weapon arm and moving offline are immediate priorities.

2. Simple and repeatable: teach low-complexity, high-probability actions that can be executed under stress.

3. Progressive and safe: use graduated stress drills, trust-based partner work, and strict safety protocols so students develop competence without unnecessary risk.

4. Ethically and legally informed: students must understand the moral and legal consequences of force and the priority of proportionality and retreat when possible.

5. Comprehensive: include medical aftercare and post-incident procedures so students understand the full scope of what surviving an attack entails.

Refusing to train because a scenario is hard is to accept that unprepared students will face that scenario with no options. I argue the opposite: the severity of the threat is the reason to teach responsibly. Even a marginal increase in survival probability — achieved through disciplined practice of simple, transferable principles — is invaluable. Prepare to avoid, prepare to escape, and prepare to defend yourself if you must: those layers together are what give a person a real chance when chance itself is unpredictable.

Train realistically and ethically

Effective preparation requires realistic, progressive training under controlled stress. Partner drills, scenario practice and decision-making under pressure help students internalise simple, effective responses so they can act instinctively when required. Training should also be informed by ethical and legal considerations — survival decisions have consequences beyond the immediate physical encounter. My A.A.E.E.L. framework (Assess, Action, Ethical, Escape, Legal) underpins both the decision process and the teaching methodology.

Conclusion

Weapons-based violence is inherently unpredictable. The goal of training should be to increase the probability of survival through prevention, simple and reliable techniques, and repeated realistic practice. Acknowledging the role of chance does not undermine training; it reinforces the need to prepare sensibly. If you wish to learn practical, evidence-driven methods for staying safe, invest in training that prioritises control, movement and realistic decision-making.