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.

If you think of a random street fight, what prevents one of the actors friends from getting involved? The factors are that the friends are either worried about getting hurt, getting in trouble, loosing face, or they believe that their friend has it handled. As the fight in question continues the values of these variables begin to change. We advantage ourselves in a fight by influencing these concerns in the minds of the bystanders. If the only thing holding me back from jumping in to help a friend was I thought he had it handled and he started losing then somebody is going to have a multiple opponent problem. Similarly, I might be worried about getting in trouble, but I might become more worried about my friend getting seriously hurt or killed.

What we would like to do is effect a 'win' so quickly and decisively that other actors are discouraged from getting involved. That 'win' might be breaking contact, an overwhelming show of force, or quickly applying devastating injury to the primary antagonist.

Attacking the opponents will is not just the impressive threat or application of violence. We can stack up small inconveniences that make it harder for the enemy to engage. Being a fast moving target forces that forces a chase will probably deter obese assailants. Being in a difficult position to fight because of barriers, footing, or circumstance might prevent the assailant from initiating.

Pepper spray is another willpower test. Far fewer people are willing to continue after a face full of spray because of the pain and impairment. The truly motivated, goal oriented, will shrug it off and continue but the casually interested are finished.

Bleeding away their will to fight with verbal interaction is also possible. Assuming that the would-be assailant isn't in an immediate position to do violence we can try to verbally deescalate. When deescalation works it is a more effective fight stopper than handgun bullets.

I don't think any of this is news, I just want people to consider using all available force to crush the enemies will to fight, and recognize that force might take the form of movement, communication, or violence.