Jennifer Cutrona was out jogging when she was attacked by a mugger. She fought him off and out of the aftermath came up with an Innovation. She built a a sports bra with a hidden pocket large enough to hold a knife or can of mace.
Who is right? All of them. As a police officer, I emphasized the ability to “perceive danger”. This imposed the first responsibility for personal safety on the individual. In that, they had to be sufficiently unencumbered (by distractions, distortions or intoxicants) that would allow them to not only see what was going on around them but correctly plug what they see into their own threat matrix. This is a three parter. The second part is to recognize the threat as a threat. The third part is to address the threat in a preplanned manner, by avoiding it (not being there in the first place), changing direction, or by confrontation (at various levels). Sometimes eye contact and a change of body language will be enough to ward off a threat.
Ms. Cutrona and Kirsten 1111 in the statements or actions have started the process of danger perception. They both acknowledge that the threat is out there and that they are conceivably targets. The point Det. LaBarbera makes is that no single solution is liable to work for everybody every time.
All I know about Ms. Cutrona is that she trains for marathons. That tells me that, in a one on one confrontation she probably has the athleticism, strength and endurance to put up a credible fight. For her, just wearing the bra may give her the heightened awareness and tools she needs to meet an attacker. Kirsten’s comments indicate that such a product may fit into her mindset, but we have no indication that she has the physical ability to deploy a weapon. Without that physical and mental ability to use a weapon, it becomes an incumbrance rather than a helpful tool. Even if she is unable to deploy a weapon, she has still made an important first step. She has acknowledged the potential threat and is planning potential responses.
I’m old, set in my ways. I like sitting with my back to wall and where I can see the entrances. When I drive, I almost always have the window down on city streets. I don’t stand in front of doorways. I don’t stand square on to a person when I’m conversing. I don’t/won’t own a set of headphones. I can’t imagine wearing headphones in public. I’m not paranoid, I have a plan…
“A product like this could only be used in the extreme case of a close physical encounter with someone meaning to do harm,” LaBarbera said. “I wouldn’t want this product to give a person a false sense of security.” Why do cops always say such stupid things. Is having NOTHING better????
Who is right? All of them. As a police officer, I emphasized the ability to “perceive danger”. This imposed the first responsibility for personal safety on the individual. In that, they had to be sufficiently unencumbered (by distractions, distortions or intoxicants) that would allow them to not only see what was going on around them but correctly plug what they see into their own threat matrix. This is a three parter. The second part is to recognize the threat as a threat. The third part is to address the threat in a preplanned manner, by avoiding it (not being there in the first place), changing direction, or by confrontation (at various levels). Sometimes eye contact and a change of body language will be enough to ward off a threat.
Ms. Cutrona and Kirsten 1111 in the statements or actions have started the process of danger perception. They both acknowledge that the threat is out there and that they are conceivably targets. The point Det. LaBarbera makes is that no single solution is liable to work for everybody every time.
All I know about Ms. Cutrona is that she trains for marathons. That tells me that, in a one on one confrontation she probably has the athleticism, strength and endurance to put up a credible fight. For her, just wearing the bra may give her the heightened awareness and tools she needs to meet an attacker. Kirsten’s comments indicate that such a product may fit into her mindset, but we have no indication that she has the physical ability to deploy a weapon. Without that physical and mental ability to use a weapon, it becomes an incumbrance rather than a helpful tool. Even if she is unable to deploy a weapon, she has still made an important first step. She has acknowledged the potential threat and is planning potential responses.
I’m old, set in my ways. I like sitting with my back to wall and where I can see the entrances. When I drive, I almost always have the window down on city streets. I don’t stand in front of doorways. I don’t stand square on to a person when I’m conversing. I don’t/won’t own a set of headphones. I can’t imagine wearing headphones in public. I’m not paranoid, I have a plan…