Suppose you know a martial art. How likely are you to get a chance to use it for self defense?

Question

One of the many benefits that martial arts schools (including my own) claim to have is 'self-defense'. In fact just about every martial art claims that this is a benefit.

In the spirit of this question:

https://health.stackexchange.com/questions/3905/lifetime-cancer-risk-for-people-with-healthy-lifestyle/3977#3977

How much of a risk is assault occasioning actual bodily harm (or assault and battery if you are American)? Obviously, if you work as a bouncer or in the police or army or as a paramedic, this will increase. I'm not interested in gun violence for this question; I have yet to see a plausible gun disarm technique (yes, I have heard of krav maga and systema).

But for an average person going about their everyday life what is the probability of being assaulted? This can be Domestic Violence, bar fights, anything.

I asked before about comparing martial arts injuries to injuries from Assault both in terms of statistics:

For what martial arts is the chance of being injured while training less than the chance of being injured by assault?

And severity:

Are injuries from Assault more Severe than those Sustained During Martial arts Practice?

No-one here really seems willing to think about this, let alone answer numerically. However, I feel the question is important enough to warrant an answer.

So let's break it down and take the sports injuries element out entirely.

Answer 1

I'm sure you could crunch numbers with a very in-depth research, but if you want a rough estimate of your odds of being assaulted over a 12 month period, you can check the following link for a crime risk calculator from BBC working with the Office for National Statistics in the UK.

Crime: How at risk are you?

This question has too many variables to be properly answered, but that calculator should give you a decent approximation as working with the Office for National Statistics. They have a good pool of data to work with considering age, sex, habitation status and employment status.

For the USA, there is the FBI Universal Crime Report .

Note that all countries will have such statistical data available. Local police offices might have the same information available for where you live.

Answer 2

The statistics in Louis' answer will be an undercount because it will not count situations where self-defense training results in avoidance.

If, like http://nononsenseselfdefense.com/, you define "self defense" as not just fighting, but also...

• Avoidance of dangerous situations through awareness,
• Avoiding looking like a potential victimizable pushover,
• Defusing confrontations,
• Appearing self-confident and fit enough that your confronter reconsiders, or even just being fit enough to run fast and far,

...then I think that your training would be a lot more likely to be useful to avoid bodily harm. "Avoiding dangerous situations in the first place" is an element of self-defense that is frequently taught alongside the more obvious physical elements of a martial art. It may not be as cinematic as bravely grappling an attacker, but using what you learned in your martial arts school to avoid situations where you'd have to do that is still a valid application of what you have learned.

Answer 3

You make a mistake thinking that martial arts is equivalent to actual self-defense. Martial arts usually has some self -defense aspects to them but they do more that self-defense.

Most martial arts have some pure formal aspects: others have some sport aspect which differs than if done on concrete.

Kata is a formal part of many martial arts. This is controversial because the old school swears by them and the modern school thinks nobody truly fights that way. This is not self-defense, although many moves in a kata can be utilized for self-defense if one is sharp enough and skilled.

Sport techniques is another aspect of many martial arts. When the term sport technique is used it generally means or implies that such a technique is risky or dangerous to do on concrete or risky to use in a real fight against a seasoned opponent. You may end up getting knocked out for not knowing the difference. BJJ in particular is famous for this. The same goes for MMA and also competition sport fighting found in Karate and Taekwondo tournaments.

Self-defense is only a part of martial arts training and not the whole. Self defense has a goal of not getting into a physical match if it can be avoided. Furthermore self-defense does not focus on winning a match but going home safely: i.e., you hit me more than I hit you before I escaped the confrontation. I made it home without getting killed or serious injury. That is self defense as opposed to hunting for a victory. You should notice the mind set is distinct from each other.

Answer 4

I'm sorry, I must admit to not being able to answer your question, except to say "it's not possible to answer your question".

First, there is no formal definition of martial arts. In my book, MA involves M-16's, throwing hand grenades, driving tanks, and battlefield management - not self defense. But others don gloves and get in a roped-off ring; or don a singlet and go mano-a-mano without hitting the other guy, or maybe get onto a mat and only kick the other guy - and they all call it "martial arts".

There are those who take one- or two-day women's self-defense classes offered by a church and are given a myriad of lifestyle changes they can do to mitigate becoming a victim.

There are those who "say" they know a martial art and are complete charlatans.

There are those who "knew" a martial art, but gave it up decades ago.

There are those who are linebackers or bodybuilders and have the physique alone which can make potential perpetrators think about another mark.

A runner might be able to outrun an attacker.

An untrained mother defending her children is an absolutely formidable opponent to tangle with.

A Medieval Times performer deft with a lance, sword, and mace could make mincemeat out of a perpetrator with a rake handle, a baseball bat, or a length of chain (and who, in my opinion, are more of a martial artist than anyone in a dojo, dojang, kwoon, or gym even though their martial arts study is limited to historical context).

What about someone only trained to use a rifle or handgun?

What about someone who is an expert in ancient medieval or feudal-era weaponry?

What about any common soldier or officer?

What about any police officer?

All of these kinds of people (except the mother) have been trained in some way to deal with adversarial antagonists. The definition of martial arts is so overly broad that each of these groups of people, by someone's definition, are considered a "martial artist".

Along a different vein, much of what the self-defense community teaches is avoidance and managing lifestyle changes - that is often more important than managing a situation in which all of that is ignored or couldn't be avoided which necessitates a physical response. And here, how can you know you avoided a situation just because you took that advice?

My point is that every term in your question is so broadly defined and subjective, it is not possible to answer it: "suppose", "you", "know", "martial art", "how likely", "get a chance to use it", and "self defense" all mean different things to different people.