Psychopaths, Sociopaths and Good men having a bad day!

When mentoring Self defence instructors, Close Protection Providers, or even on the many professional courses we teach, I often get asked how do I discern the difference between Psychopaths, sociopaths and just a normal everyday person having a bad day during a confrontation. It is both as easy and as complicated as you want to make it.?

I however often find myself asking why is it that this question has become so important to so many, when personally I give it very little thought at all, in this context

My answer usually revolves around this theme. My clients/students/mentees seldom come to me without having first passed before other more traditional or conventional Instructors. Many instructors in this field have very little to offer in terms of ‘effective solutions’ for the problems presented to them. Solutions often fall outside their standard curriculums. Filling in the spaces in their technical knowledge with academic or medical terminologies to make them look (to the uninitiated) and feel smart when they are actually stumbling over the repetition of failed systems and techniques, that they themselves learned parrot fashion but have never tested.?

It seems people who may have to say ‘NO’, and therefore confront the wrath of anger from, anti-social and possibly violent adversaries are obsessed with this question, and in some academic professions they probably should be, but in many others they definitely should not. Let me try to explain.

Here is my standard definition of:

• Psychopaths; are born with neurophysiological abnormalities. Dysfunctional biological regulation to fear and emotional responses.
• Sociopaths; are bred, that is to say childhood trauma, abuse, lack of stability in family life, irregular upbringing, and social (anti-social induction) has taught them to be unsympathetic.

When violent intent is involved, Psychopaths, someone with no conscience, may act without hesitation because they don't feel guilt, fear of prosecution or remorse.?

Whereas Sociopaths, someone lacking empathy might act violently because they don’t comprehend or value the pain they cause others, or they just don't care.

Clinically, there is no difference between the two terms, and both fall under the umbrella diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD).?

Either one will do violence upon you. What they feel afterwards will not change the condition you find yourself in!

As someone confronting violence regularly it makes no difference to me the psychological diagnosis attached to the person performing the violence on/towards me. If they are demonstrating signs of ‘Violent Intent’,? that needs to be dealt with in a way that renders them no longer a threat to me, or the person(s) in my care.?

I understand that is is not a popular opinion in our parliments and indeed the media. This may be due to a certain factor of 'a need to maintain control' by our leaders and a total misrepresentation of the true facts by our media on their behalf, or it might not! What is sure is that society and a failure to care for many with issues that should be managed by the state have infact overspilled into everyday life, leaving you and I to deal with the consequences, and the opinion seems to be that all should be treated with kid gloves, avoiding hurting feelings or bodies, whilst the effects on the individual defender hold little importance for the government, legal system and by dilution, our societies.

Unconsciousness applied swiftly, is usually (but not always) the best method for obtaining the desired effect should attempts at avoidance and? verbal dissuasion fail.

This can be applied as blunt force cranial trauma, or restriction of the blood flow to the brain, both having the same effect on your aggressor. Complete capitulation in the guise of Sleep! In my experience the second option, blood chokes-vascular restriction, (not strangulation-? airways restriction, if you don’t know the difference do not attempt them!) has always proven the most reliable, effective, and safest for me, and I would suggest for all those who wish to remain free from incarceration. It causes less tissue trauma, is easier to control in most situations and can be applied quickly, from a variety of positions and on all shapes and sizes, with some practice.?

It is not fool proof, and believe me there are more than enough fools out there!?

Many agencies and training providers are shying away from these techniques. Due to an almost insignificant (by % of violent acts, not by the affects on family and loved ones) number of highly publicised deaths. (Ask yourself, WHY are these cases selected to be highly publicised, when they count for so few of the reported incidents?)

I believe this to be a huge mistake. Knee jerk reactions removing less lethal weapons to be used for good which will inevitably, in the short or long term be replaced by ever more dangerous choices, like a firearm, for instance.??

Yes someone somewhere may have died as a result of a badly applied technique usually performed by someone with the bare minimum of skill development. Which is far removed from the hundreds of thousands of times such techniques have been used without any permanent injury by adequately trained persons.?

Chokes, in these complex situations, are by far the lesser of two evils! Again that’s just me being me and looking from my perspective!

Your personal opinions and perspective on the ethics of force come into play right here too, this is what we call ‘Orientation’ in your preparation to use force.

Blunt force trauma, regardless of the delivery system, is difficult to control, you usually hit as hard as you can, as fast as you can and that in itself can be, and may be judged to be, excessive. It can also be difficult to control the descent of an unconscious and falling, (usually away from you), ex-aggressor.?

Environmental impact, in this instance not global warming but his head impacting on the concrete floor, can often do more damage than you had planned and can result in death. A hard one to defend legally even if you did, “only hit him once”!?

Blunt force trauma deployed as a strike (punching, elbows, kicking, knees, headbutts etc.) often does visible damage to your aggressor which will need to be explained, either to the boss or the police, maybe even the judge, there will be police photos of your 'victim' for all to see which can sway a judge or jury against you, and should the altercation be videoed it will often look aggressive and messy.

Unless, of course you get the one punch knockout, quickly delivered. Which in itself is not the ‘Unicorn’ some instructors like you to believe it is. It too needs practice, and often pre-emption, which may look like you didn’t pursue the path of least resistance (de-escalation) to bystanders and would-be witnesses, at least to the uninitiated.

As always choose your weapons with care and in accordance with the threat level.

Obviously, being able to pigeon hole a psychological trait may seem like a great advantage to some but the context of the situation prior to violence happening is where that is important, at least in my humble opinion. Prior to violence there are many avenues to explore for avoidance and having insight into your adversaries mental stability and their possible intentions can help you to achieve much when we talk of de-escalation. I have discussed this in previous articles.?

I believe some get stuck here with technicalities. Psychological behaviour and the prediction of it can be immensely beneficial to our social interactions, on so many levels, as well as our ability to spot and avoid threats in advance.?

However, once things go physical your options become extremely limited, extremely quickly, and you MUST recognise that negotiation is off the table.

I know that many industry experts disagree with me and I fully understand their ‘politically correct’ desire to please all. The truth can alienate potential customers who do not share your views. That is to say, they take no firm stance that could offend part of their client base or easily offend the HR department, restricting their business growth, whilst maintaining a level of generally accepted and often repeated, “violence is bad” attitude. This prevents them from facing the truth of the matter. Anti-social behaviour and Social aggression are precursors to the possibility of violence but are not in and of themselves violence. Violence of thought, and all the shouting and screaming it might entail is not yet violence.?

Violence happens in the physical state. Remember that and everything else becomes negotiable.

Timely anecdote:?

I love Cave Diving. [to scuba dive in environments that do not allow for direct ascent to the surface and contain no natural light source]. It can be quite dangerous if you don’t follow the rules. As cave divers we have a little saying “there is only one emergency. OUT OF AIR.” That is to say you cannot access breathing air immediately, which in a very short-time will result in death. That is an emergency situation that must be resolved with haste, but in a controlled manner. Everything else that happens under water is an ‘inconvenience' that must be dealt with rationally, as long as you have air to breath it is not an emergency and therefore you have choices, it's negotiable!.

Violence is an emergency situation that must be dealt with immediately. Failure to do so could result in death. Everything else, aggression, anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse, social aggression, shouting and screaming are all inconveniences that must be dealt with rationally, but as long as it doesn’t go physical it is not yet an emergency, it's negotiable!

In that context the state of mind of your aggressor has very little to do with your actions. They have already passed the behavioural analysis phase. It has already passed the verbal de-escalation as a first response phase. A greater measure of violence must be applied immediately, to stop the violence, potential violence, being committed against you and in itself could assist in the de-escalation process.?

It should be noted here that higher levels of violence can go a long way to ending a violent interaction as well as presenting a position of rest-bite during which verbal persuasion may be reintroduced to the conflict to deescalate. The simple fact that violence has been introduced does not mean it cannot be later reduced, once YOU have control of the situation. Failing to achieve this control quickly and efficiently could be the greatest and possibly the last? mistake you will ever make.

So back to Psychopaths, sociopaths and good men having a bad day. Important distinctions to make pre-physical contact.

You can usually, usually but not always, negotiate with a ‘Good man having a bad day’. He has no personal grudge with you. He has not profiled you and selected you for violence. He has not previously investigated you and you do not fit any predetermined profile as his victim. He is literally a ‘Good man having a bad day’ and you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

His aggression is a stranger to him and he is not comfortable in its presence!

Deescalation in this situation should be quite easy so long as you show a little empathy for the situation he finds himself in.?

However:

One of the problems with Psychopathy for example is that a psychopath can quite easily fit into a socially acceptable verbal exchange, display reason and even friendliness if it suits his agenda. So don’t ever let your guard down when it looks like the danger has passed.

A rule of mine is “trust no one”. Yes I know it may seem excessive but hey, it has served me well for many years now!

Is the psychological definition of someone's state of mind of use to us once we go physical?

As I said earlier, even once you have used violence to reduce the violence aimed at you, a good man may be reasoned with. You may be able to say something like “I am sorry I had to resort to that, and I’m sorry that the situation has come to this. My actions were only to protect everyone involved, including you, because I believe there was no safer way to handle the moment. I’m not your enemy. I am not the source of your anger and I will not accept it. I hope you can understand my position so let’s take a step back and find a way to move forward safely. I do not want this to get worse!”.

?

This is not the moment to drop your guard, and if assistance is on its way, and you believe that in your environment it is safe to do so, maybe you should stay just where you are until it arrives. If not, pay very close attention to your surroundings, whilst removing yourself from the situation and move quickly in the direction of ‘away’!

Here’s the kicker:

• If it is not a good guy having a bad day, you are still at risk.
• The jails are full of “Good guys that had a bad day”!

So again I have to ask, is the distinction even important?

As academics and investigators we often need to analyse subjects and situations and in doing so all the information we can discern in regards to our antagonists mental state and psychological attributes is not only valuable but often invaluable to us.?

When do we rely on our skills as behavioural or psychological analysts? Before and after the ‘event’.

That is: Prior to anything of consequence happening, with the intention of stopping it, and of course after the event with the intention of capturing the guilty party and prosecuting them judicially.

Analysing the mental state of our adversary is not something we need to be doing during the violence, and I might argue that it has only very little benefit in the immediate lead up to violence, because as professionals there should, in fact, be minimal lead-up!

If 'they' show violent tendencies, 'they' need to be stopped quickly, efficiently and if at all possible using only the most reasonable amount of force to be effective. Affording us ‘Reasonable mitigation’, should it be required later. Whilst always bearing in mind that, underestimating the violent intent of your adversary could cost you your life, or the life of someone you are responsible for keeping alive.

Should you wish to know more feel free to comment or reach out to me privately:

We provide Governmental, Corporate, and civilian security services and training in Spain and Latin America.

We can organise advanced reconnaissance and investigations services for visiting CPTs, and we have our own CP personnel throughout Spain, Portugal and Andorra and into Northern Africa.

Options are available to those who wish to increase their personal safety, the safety of their loved ones or clients, or who wish to advance their careers in Close Protection with professional no-nonsense skillsets.

I teach private, mainly academic, online classes, and in-person; private, family, and group classes in Cádiz province, as well as Barcelona, Tarragona and Madrid, in Spain.

The subject matter I cover includes but is not limited to: My D.A.D.A. program. Detect, Avoid, Distract, Attack (CQC). Situational awareness and avoiding problematic situations; Behavioural (people) profiling for your safety; Situational control and tactical conversation; Physical solutions for violent situations; Security at home and protection solutions.

In-person classes can include in-depth physical combative training. The use of physical violence for your safety and security.

If you would like information on any of the above subjects feel free to DM me and we can have an informal "chat" old school style!

Alternatively contact me at: www.insafehands.net

[email protected]