How do you handle the sensitivity of others, especially when discussing military-related topics like weapons and self-defense?

Consider an average discussion about self-defense, something civilians and vets can and should talk about. Then, consider how that discussion quickly leads to different types of defense. You might mention knives, and talk about the way knives are gripped, hanlded, and used and explain quickly that some pierce and some slice, but the point is to do damage and make an escape. People must be careful with knives because they can hit a bone or different parts of the flesh and end up hurting themselves in the process. Knives demand skilled use in terms of self-defense. Or, somebody mentions handguns, as they should. You quickly mention the difference in calibers and what their effect is, how some bullets enact enough force to put people down on the ground, some don't, some go through the body and some don't. All of this is part of an intelligent and responsible discussion about self-defense.

However, some consider this grotesque and unecessary. We don't need to be talking about the tearing and ripping of flesh, or hitting bones with knives, or putting people down. Fair enough. Yet, isn't that the age-old discussion around us military folk anyway? Violent things happen all around the world and we're often involved in them. We should talk about them. Yet, people's sensitivities to violence can often make this discussion hard to have.

How do you handle this? Do you tone it down, give a disclaimer, lean into it?