So in the unarmed combatives system that I am currently practicing/teaching there is a shortage of throws and takedowns. I feel that this is something that the system should be addressed because quickly and efficiently dropping people has some significant tactical advantages in some situations. My question is that given a seminar format program, rather than a dedicated school, what throwing techniques would you include into the system?

Because of the format of the training course we must recognize that we cannot depend upon strength, speed, timing, or finesse. Additionally we need something that is semi-safe to practice when the participants are not particularly good or familiar with (Ukemi) Break Falls.

The (Kazushi) breaking of the opponents balance needs to be the rear or rear obliques, and cannot include any (Sutemi) Sacrafice throws as primary technique, in fact I am biased against most the sweeps, reaps, and hooks because of the compromise of balance.

I talked about psychological stopping in this post: The Stop. In a recent discussion with a close friend we came to agree that wars are won in the will. The military talks about "imposing your will on the battlefield" but I don't know that most people really get it. You have to deprive the enemy of the will to fight. This fundamental truth is applied in all forms of human conflict. It is a matter of dissuading participation, and raising the cost of failure.

Much of the argument that people will be disarmed of their weapons and have those weapons used against them stems from a long history of police officers being shot with their own firearms. To combat this problem law enforcement has adopted various handgun retention systems.

While the private citizen carrying a concealed firearm isn't as likely to be a target for a disarm while the firearm is holstered, I can certainly see a number of scenarios where an assailant might make an attempt against a drawn gun.

I ran across this: The Art of Verbal Intimidation, I thought it was interesting but not very self-defense related. It is more geared toward difficult people at work. Management by intimidation is a sign of a company on the rocks.

The real lesson is that you must be assertive. Understand what your operating parameters are (both in the workplace and other areas of your life.) I am not going to get screamed at. I am not going to get touched. I am not going to let someone get in my face to talk to me. On the street this sort of behavior is a pre-cursor to violence, why would that be any different in the workplace?

I frequently come across some facet of the 'styles' debate. This is where somebody argues what will and what will not 'work' in real life. This is generally a lot of 'my kung fu is stronger' type of chest thumping. The basic mechanics of many techniques are pretty much the same across arts. The targets my differ a bit, but the timing of when the technique is inserted is probably the largest difference. All of this is philosophy, doctrine, or dogma. The point is that if you insert the right technique correctly at the right time you will get a positive result.

Reading this bit: Leave it to the professionals I am left with the impression that the author doesn't understand the complexities involved.