Krav Maga Boston | Articles On Group Violence

Group Violence

Articles On Multiple Attackers

Group & Gang Violence

There are three assumptions that are worth make when interacting and dealing with aggressive individuals: one, is that they are armed, even if there in no weapon visible; two, they are able, competent, and have the physical skills and means to be successful in a physical confrontation; and three, they are assisted i.e., there are third parties in the environment – who may not be obvious and visible – who can, and will, come to their aid. The presence of multiple attackers complicates any violent confrontation as it is necessary to subdue more than one person in order to create a safe disengagement opportunity. It is not just the physical, and tactical, issues that need to be considered when dealing with group violence, there is also the issue of intent and group psychology etc. Something that changes the tone, nature, and character of the incident e.g., attackers will feed of each other emotionally, and may have different goals from each other, and adopt different roles to one another etc. This makes such incidents far more complex events that attacks by a single assailant. There are also other risks which present themselves in multiple assailant scenarios, such as the danger of being dragged to the ground by sheer weight of numbers etc.

Because many forms of violence, such as muggings and street robberies, involve more than one assailant, we must be prepared to deal with physical altercations that involve multiple attackers – we should also realize because of this that acquiescing to certain demands increases our chances of surviving many situations e.g., we are more likely to emerge unharmed from a street robbery involving several people if we hand over our wallet/possessions than if we refuse and force the incident to become a physical one etc. We should also recognize those situations where we have no option to run and/or fight e.g., in incidents of recreational violence where groups and gangs actively go out seeking somebody to violently victimize, there really are no options but to either physically disengage or engage. Whilst there may be opportunities to de-escalate and dissuade an individual from using violence, trying to do so with an amped up group, where each member has their own motivations and desires is unlikely to be successful; especially when group members are emotionally feeding of each other to maintain their energy and high.

In many group situations individuals lose their inhibitions and feel less responsible for their own actions and behaviors i.e., they see the group collectively sharing the responsibility for an act of violence etc. This is one of the reasons why group violence is so volatile and unpredictable; members will commit more extreme and heinous acts when they feel less responsibility, and an obligation to act in a certain way/direction because that is what they believe the group wants etc. Also, the feeling of belonging to a group makes an individual an “insider”, with those outside the group seen as “outsiders” who are by default less important and in some ways may be seen to inherently challenge the group, and those that belong to it. When all of these things come together group violence can become more extreme and violent than anything a single member would commit and engage in.

References

Bilali, R., Tropp, L., & Dasgupta, N. (2012). Attributions of Responsibility and Perceived Harm in the Aftermath of Mass Violence. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 18(1): 21-39.

Castano, E., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2006). Not Quite Human: Infrahumanization in Response to Collective Responsibility for Intergroup Killing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90(5): 804-818.

Sherif, M., White, H. J., & Sherif, C. (1961). Intergroup Conflict and Co-operation: The Robber's Cave Experiment. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange