PDA

View Full Version : In Response to Antigun Mentality of "Just Learn Karate"


PsychGuy274
07-26-2010, 5:57 AM
Self-defense instructional video in response to comment made by anti-gunners at the recent Catfish Club debate.

2REG3-Wb5gM

gtturborex
07-26-2010, 6:01 AM
Hahaha. Thats great!!

M1A Rifleman
07-26-2010, 6:41 AM
Martial Arts is useless unless...

I wimpy kid I new in the 80's was taking Karate. It did not help him when he was getting stuffed into his locker by a bigger bully. The Bully kept repeating, "Com'on, let me see your karate moves". Watching this in horror was a reason I never persued a martial art. I figured a base ball bat or other would be better if things needed correction.

darksands
07-26-2010, 6:55 AM
Martial Arts is useless unless...

I wimpy kid I new in the 80's was taking Karate. It did not help him when he was getting stuffed into his locker by a bigger bully. The Bully kept repeating, "Com'on, let me see your karate moves". Watching this in horror was a reason I never persued a martial art. I figured a base ball bat or other would be better if things needed correction.

As someone that has done martial arts, I can say that it's not about the fighting or self defense when you are < middle school. But then again, the little kids that I know that get picked on fight back if absolutely necessary. The wimpy kid you knew must not have learned what to do.

sholling
07-26-2010, 7:00 AM
Penn & Teller had a pretty good episode of BS on the subject of martial arts.

BigDogatPlay
07-26-2010, 7:01 AM
No crack for you today, my friend.

ROFLMAO

Martial arts are fun, great for learning self discipline and a good way to spend lots of money learning how. The downside, at least as I have seen it, is that most martial arts require more practice than shooting to retain a high level of proficiency.

taloft
07-26-2010, 7:09 AM
When it comes to the Martial Arts I have yet to find one that makes you bullet proof.:D

darksands
07-26-2010, 7:17 AM
When it comes to the Martial Arts I have yet to find one that makes you bullet proof.:D

Didn't you watch bulletproof monk??? Or The Last Dragon where he catches the bullet in his teeth?

But in all seriousness, it comes in handy for those that can't carry around a gun all the time. That and within 10 ft, a gun may be difficult to pull off unless you are holding it ready to go.

Stealth
07-26-2010, 7:24 AM
I have studied martial arts for 18 years now. I learned that good self-defense means not limiting your options or methods.

If anyone who says Karate is it. Or guns are it. You are limiting your options. You are restricting your skill set. You are setting yourself up to fail.

Learn karate. Have a gun. Practice both :)

Oh and for a good laugh on martial arts -- you tube search - monty python's how to defend against fruit.

Andy Taylor
07-26-2010, 7:33 AM
The marial arts are a great way to get in and stay in shape, and to learn disipline. To really be profitiant enough to have a real advantage in a fight, you have to continuously practice.

yellowfin
07-26-2010, 8:34 AM
Karate? Blah. Krav Maga or sambo maybe, martial arts where people actually get hurt on purpose instead of combatsturbation.

Decoligny
07-26-2010, 8:35 AM
When it comes to the Martial Arts I have yet to find one that makes you bullet proof.:D

You obviously haven't seen "Remo Williams - The Adventure Begins".

The ancient art of Sinanju not only allows you to dodge bullets, but to also run on wet cement, or across water. :rolleyes:

Sutcliffe
07-26-2010, 8:41 AM
never heard the term, but I think I likes it.

mblat
07-26-2010, 8:50 AM
No crack for you today, my friend.

ROFLMAO

Martial arts are fun, great for learning self discipline and a good way to spend lots of money learning how. The downside, at least as I have seen it, is that most martial arts require more practice than shooting to retain a high level of proficiency.

That the answer right here. I know ONE person who truly do not need a gun or a knife to defend himself...... Of cause he trains every day. Who has a time for that?
Funny part is he also has a CCW and always carries......;)

dantodd
07-26-2010, 9:03 AM
And is useless to the elderly, out of shape, disabled, I could go on but sometimes fish in the barrel don't need to be shot.

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 9:11 AM
I think the best response to such a stupid arguement is that "Ninjas aren't faster than bullets".

Not to mention if karate is all that is needed to defend one's self against any manner or impliment of attack then the COPs shouldn't need them either.

Woulda been the best retort to Saldana's reason for having armed security with her. I would responded with "If guns aren't needed for defense of self and others then why not just hire some blackbelts to protect you today Ms. Saldana?"

ZenDaddy
07-26-2010, 9:21 AM
I bought my wife a 600$ 9mm blackbelt just the other day!

Muaythaishooter
07-26-2010, 9:25 AM
Martial arts are great! They aren't useless. People who say their useless took the wrong martial art or they suck at it. Traditional arts such as karate I admit isn't practical.

I can't carry a gun 24/7. Am I too plead for my life when I don't have a gun? I have taken martial arts since I was 8 and I'm 32. Muay thai and BJJ have been quite practical for me on the street especially in Oakland (undefeated). I do like krav magas practicality but not the techniques. However In the boxing ring I have lost 6 out of 28 fights. But anyone on this forum who says martial arts are useless. PM me and let's set up friendly competition and ill prove it. But don't bring a firearm.

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 9:55 AM
But anyone on this forum who says martial arts are useless.
I don't think that they are useless, but they are only suited for some people. For those many of us who cannot do the practice, including the elderly and disabled, they are next to useless.

However, you have to be really disabled to be unable to pull a trigger.

Guns are easier to learn, do not take the hours and hours of dedicated practice (unless you really want to be top shooter), are suited to far more people and have a much longer range.

I don't care how good you are at whatever martial art you like, I'll back my Glock or 1911 at ten plus yards against you. And I am over 65 and am registered as disabled.

Just ask Indiana Jones how to tackle a whirling dervish with swords in both hands.

Muaythaishooter
07-26-2010, 10:07 AM
I don't think that they are useless, but they are only suited for some people. For those many of us who cannot do the practice, including the elderly and disabled, they are next to useless.

However, you have to be really disabled to be unable to pull a trigger.

Guns are easier to learn, do not take the hours and hours of dedicated practice (unless you really want to be top shooter), are suited to far more people and have a much longer range.

I don't care how good you are at whatever martial art you like, I'll back my Glock or 1911 at ten plus yards against you. And I am over 65 and am registered as disabled.

Oh I see! You have a very good point! Although I trained a 64 year old woman for 3 months. She wasn't bad. But she still wouldn't stand a chance against an attacker. I agree with you. It does take a lot of patience and practice for martial arts. If I were disabled and eldery or in a state where i cant apply martial arts I would put my Glocks against anyone. Actually all the professional fighting that i have done has caused ailments in my joints where I feel like Im disabled when i get up in the morning.

ZombieTactics
07-26-2010, 10:15 AM
I cannot think of a single instance where my life was at risk where I would not prefer a good gun over almost any open-handed martial art.

In some cases a knife might be more useful ... which sort of blurs the line in a way.

Thankfully, the right kind of martial arts with a real fighting focus can be quite useful. Otherwise, I'd be dead, instead of just having put 2 out of 7 of them in the hospital. The other 5 reconsidered with only minor broken fingers, poked eyes ... thank God for a broomstick when you need one ... and I still pretty much had the crap kicked out of me. Nobody ever wins a real fight.

dantodd
07-26-2010, 10:28 AM
But anyone on this forum who says martial arts are useless. PM me and let's set up friendly competition and ill prove it. But don't bring a firearm.

Doesn't that defeat the entire content of the rest of your post? Or do you only plan on getting attacked by unarmed men in Oakland?

Muaythaishooter
07-26-2010, 10:48 AM
I cannot think of a single instance where my life was at risk where I would not prefer a good gun over almost any open-handed martial art.

In some cases a knife might be more useful ... which sort of blurs the line in a way.

Thankfully, the right kind of martial arts with a real fighting focus can be quite useful. Otherwise, I'd be dead, instead of just having put 2 out of 7 of them in the hospital. The other 5 reconsidered with only minor broken fingers, poked eyes ... thank God for a broomstick when you need one ... and I still pretty much had the crap kicked out of me. Nobody ever wins a real fight.

I suppose so. Call me crazy or stupid, but when I have gotten into street fights with gangbanger and thugs, I don't consider it life threatening unless they have a weapon. When i lived in Echo Park and in Gardena in LA, I got jumped by vatos almost on a monthly basis. I was outnumbered instead of facing weapons. Never had a gun or knife pulled on me. I got beat up as a teen a lot but taken at least one with me.

I think I don't consider it life threatening because Im desensitized by the encounters with LA gangbangers and oakland thugs. My martial arts training and experience has also made street fights a comfortable arena for me. Thugs and gangbangers aren't skilled fighters. I actually don't like fighting on the street because i tend to get hurt regardless if I kick the carp out of them and you never know what weapons they have. And i don't know what there blood born pathogens they have.

But I hold grudges against any vato or oakland thug. All the encounters I have had on the street is selfdefense or helping someone else. Every encounter was because I was walking somonewhere or going for a jog. Oakland and parts of LA need serious help though.

ZenMasta
07-26-2010, 11:04 AM
I LOL'd.

Flopper
07-26-2010, 11:32 AM
Penn & Teller had a pretty good episode of BS on the subject of martial arts.

+1

They have a lot of interesting shows.

Steyr_223
07-26-2010, 11:36 AM
Martial Arts training is learned skill for using a tool, in this case the human body. Some can spend a few weeks or months to master the basics..Others can train for a lifetime and never learn anything useful. Styles, frequency and training methods matter

Personally, my martial arts training compliments my firearms training. There are certain situations and places were firearms are not available nor necessary.

jdberger
07-26-2010, 11:40 AM
.
http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/32053-4/wheelchair8396.jpg

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/30073-4/nominalprey7307.jpg

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/29301-4/karate5720.jpg

SPaikmos
07-26-2010, 11:42 AM
We can debate the utility of martial arts all day, but I'll leave you a couple of analogies:

1) Why learn to swim if you can ride a boat or use a jet ski almost everywhere? I know people who never learned to swim, and think it's a useless skill.

IMHO, any tool can be taken from you (guns included) but knowledge, skill, and training remain with you wherever you are. That includes planes, inside a GFSZ, courtroom, prison (if you ever end up there), etc. I agree that a gun is a great SD tool, but you can't have it with you always.


2) If you spend just 3 months inside a high school football program, you will know more about football than the average NFL fan.

My point here is that most people (probably 95%) don't know the first thing about fighting. Many people watch UFC and MMA, etc, but don't know the first thing about fighting. I've trained for 10+ years now, and when I teach new students, the first thing I teach them is how to throw a proper punch. After just a couple classes, I would say that my students have better punching technique than 95% of the people out there. Does that mean they can beat 95% of the population? Of course not; strength and size still matter a lot too.

People have a lot of misconceptions of what martial arts is. Learning a martial art doesn't mean you can tap someone on the forehead and make their head explode. It means you are maximizing the lethality of your body to its potential. Not to mention training your mind as well, which in many cases is more important than the physical skills.

A 65 yo black belt might not be able to take out a 25 yo thug, but he will last a lot longer than a 65 yo guy with zero training. And if the fight takes longer than the 25 yo thug expected, he might just leave instead of finishing it.

Just like guns, I think training is more essential than the weapon itself.

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 11:50 AM
A 65 yo black belt might not be able to take out a 25 yo thug, but he will last a lot longer than a 65 yo guy with zero training. And if the fight takes longer than the 25 yo thug expected, he might just leave instead of finishing it.

There are those of us that, even if we had earned a black belt at some time in the distant pass, can barely walk, slowly, from the disabled car parking space to the store and back. On a good day. I think a twelve year old thug with a baseball bat would be a problem for me, let alone a 25 year old. But I can still draw and fire quite rapidly.

I went to an action shooting competition (nothing formal) a year or two back. My times on the stages where one had to run from point to point, shooting down the targets one handed, were laughable. But I knocked over more of the targets in a row weak handed than anyone else did.

SPaikmos
07-26-2010, 11:54 AM
I don't care how good you are at whatever martial art you like, I'll back my Glock or 1911 at ten plus yards against you. And I am over 65 and am registered as disabled.

10+ yards, eh? Because, you always see your attacker from 30 ft away before he's on you, right? For a 65 yo, you must have good eyesight!

Just ask Indiana Jones how to tackle a whirling dervish with swords in both hands.

And a ninja would have taken out Indy before he knew what hit him. But they wouldn't show that in the movies because it wouldn't be any fun if the hero died halfway through. :)

(btw- what did you think about him firing a weapon without a good backstop? awfully irresponsible of him...)

fnslpmark112
07-26-2010, 11:56 AM
Martial arts actually help your gun fighting skills because they teach you to how to win. You learn how to see weakness and strength and you learn principles of strategy and tactics that transcend punching, kicking, and grappling.

You can't always count on having your gun. What if you get thrown into jail with "Bubba" because some rookie cop does not like the looks of your OLL? All the marksmanship skills in the world will not help you then.

I am 48 years old. 165lbs, 5'10. I have trained in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for 17 years. I often spar with 200lb+, 21 year old kids that watch a bunch of MMA and decide they want to learn it for real. Even at my age, it is like taking candy from a baby. Age is not an excuse.

If you pick the right art, it will benefit you greatly.

Full Clip
07-26-2010, 12:02 PM
Martial arts are fun, great for learning self discipline and a good way to spend lots of money learning how. The downside, at least as I have seen it, is that most martial arts require more practice than shooting to retain a high level of proficiency.

And if you're very small in stature or above a certain age and unable to truly perform said martial arts, are you just supposed to play victim?

God made man, Smith & Wesson made them equal.

Bhobbs
07-26-2010, 12:06 PM
Martial Arts would be good in situations where you cannot reach your firearm. That way you can distance yourself from the attacker(s) and then pull out your firearm.

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 12:09 PM
10+ yards, eh? Because, you always see your attacker from 30 ft away before he's on you, right? For a 65 yo, you must have good eyesight!



And a ninja would have taken out Indy before he knew what hit him. But they wouldn't show that in the movies because it wouldn't be any fun if the hero died halfway through. :)


Without a firearm with me, almost anyone could take me out at any distance whatsoever, and my body is not physically capable of these martial arts.

With a firearm I stand a chance.

My point was that martial arts have a more limited range. Who cares whether it is 30 feet or twenty, at either point I might not recognize a thug, but I would certainly see him well enough to keep out of his way.

Remember that the police are taught that anyone within 21 feet is a serious threat and can kill you before you know it.


(btw- what did you think about him firing a weapon without a good backstop? awfully irresponsible of him...)

As I remember the scene, shooting anyone behind the dervish would have been a bonus :D

Fine, if you want to practice one or more of these martial arts. I am sure that they are good exercise and some help in a fight. But, if you are saying that everyone is capable of using them and that they are as broadly useful as a firearm, then I think you are sadly mistaken. And I have studied them myself. Not well, because I was naturally clumsy even when I was young. I once asked my instructor what to do if I was attacked in the street. His advice was "Poke your finger in his eye and run like heck!"

I have four close relatives that are/were Tai Kwando black belts (two of them instructors.) They feel the same way, they would rather have a gun.

fnslpmark112
07-26-2010, 12:09 PM
Small is not an excuse. I have seen MANY tough small guys. Age is not an excuse. Most people hide behind age when they do not take care of themselves (eat too much, drink too much, do not exercise ect...).

Some people can't do martial arts. Fine. The list is shorter than you would think. But, there are many who could that would benefit from the experience.

You can have a gun AND do martial arts. One will reinforce the other.

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 12:16 PM
Small is not an excuse. I have seen MANY tough small guys. Age is not an excuse. Most people hide behind age when they do not take care of themselves (eat too much, drink too much, do not exercise ect...).

Some people can't do martial arts. Fine. The list is shorter than you would think. But, there are many who could that would benefit from the experience.

You can have a gun AND do martial arts. One will reinforce the other.

So, let's exterminate these useless people.

510dat
07-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Small is not an excuse. I have seen MANY tough small guys. Age is not an excuse. Most people hide behind age when they do not take care of themselves (eat too much, drink too much, do not exercise ect...).

Some people can't do martial arts. Fine. The list is shorter than you would think. But, there are many who could that would benefit from the experience.

You can have a gun AND do martial arts. One will reinforce the other.

So, back to the thread topic:

Do you agree with the statement that, because it is possible to learn martial arts, people should not be allowed to carry handguns?

and/or,

Do you think that people should learn martial arts instead of carrying handguns?

Those are the two arguments that we are trying to counter here.

Sutcliffe
07-26-2010, 12:23 PM
I seem to recall that the asian martial arts were in response to the commoners being disarmed by the ruling elite.
Things never really seem to change. Do they?

N6ATF
07-26-2010, 12:23 PM
So, let's exterminate these useless people.

LMFAO

fnslpmark112
07-26-2010, 12:35 PM
Glock22fan, I actually propose the opposite. I believe you should be able to own any gun you want, no waiting periods, mag limits, and you should not need a permit or any other government permission slip to carry it everywhere you go.

At the same time, don't deny yourself the benefits of learning to defend yourself when you do not have your gun. It is not an either or question.

Most gun owners see themselves as victims. The minute someone mentions they might go to jail, they worry about "Bubba". This is a character defect that you should avoid. If you were thinking right, Bubba should have to worry about you.

winnre
07-26-2010, 12:47 PM
Karate? How about the ching-ching method?

toopercentmlk
07-26-2010, 12:59 PM
Martial Arts is useless unless...

I wimpy kid I new in the 80's was taking Karate. It did not help him when he was getting stuffed into his locker by a bigger bully. The Bully kept repeating, "Com'on, let me see your karate moves". Watching this in horror was a reason I never persued a martial art. I figured a base ball bat or other would be better if things needed correction.

What I gained from martial arts while growing up had little to do with winning a fight. It was mostly about avoiding the fight and learning respect for those who deserve it.

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 1:04 PM
Glock22fan, I actually propose the opposite. I believe you should be able to own any gun you want, no waiting periods, mag limits, and you should not need a permit or any other government permission slip to carry it everywhere you go.

At the same time, don't deny yourself the benefits of learning to defend yourself when you do not have your gun. It is not an either or question.

Most gun owners see themselves as victims. The minute someone mentions they might go to jail, they worry about "Bubba". This is a character defect that you should avoid. If you were thinking right, Bubba should have to worry about you.

I agree with you, except that for some of us, there is little we can do to improve our health and partake in anything fast, strenuous or even, in my case, repetitive.We are, pretty well, reduced to firearms, pepper spray, canes and, perhaps, knives (but even proper training for some of those is problematical.)

I'm not knocking the value of martial arts, any more than I'd knock the value of Seal training. But, even starting something like that would be laughable - my body could not take it. And that's something that exercise and proper eating won't fix.

CalNRA
07-26-2010, 1:06 PM
Small is not an excuse. I have seen MANY tough small guys. Age is not an excuse. Most people hide behind age when they do not take care of themselves (eat too much, drink too much, do not exercise ect...).


what do you do for a living?

My family consists of a long list of coal miners. They often died of black lungs in their mid 50s. In the real world when people have to make a living and support families, learning karate is kinda down on the list.

SPaikmos
07-26-2010, 1:09 PM
I say look at self defense as layering, just like HD.

For HD, the recommendation is to get a dog, house alarm, motion lights, firearms, etc. No single item is the ultimate HD tool.

I think SD has the same things. Guns are good, but they are not the end all be all. Personally, I like edged weapons, but again, not the best in all situations either. SD should have layers too, so you've got firearms, knives, marital arts, situational awareness, etc.

As for not being capable to learn or use martial arts, that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you decide you can't do it, then you won't. It's good that you are very proficient with a firearm, and I encourage you to learn some form of hand-to-hand combat, if only to explore what you can and cannot do. You may be surprised but what you can achieve if you simply try.

At the least, having a place where you can practice techniques and try things out in a controlled environment is a great thing.

inbox485
07-26-2010, 1:46 PM
When somebody says they don't need a gun because they do martial arts I cringe. They can have all the fun they want at the gym, but if they can't grasp the value of a gun, they lack combat mindset - plain and simple.

On the other hand, when a gunnie says that martial arts are useless because they have a gun, I cringe the same way for the same reason.

If you want to learn to fight the best advice I can put in the form of text is don't get caught up in some sort of tool fetish (be that tool a fist, knife, gun, ancient Chinese wooden dohicky, etc.). More often than not, the karate types I've met have fist and foot fetishes. Gunnies have handgun rifle fetishes. Most dojo training is about as fight survival related as range training. Learn anything you can, when you can, and figure out what will work for you (nobody has perfect health).

dantodd
07-26-2010, 1:52 PM
On the other hand, when a gunnie says that martial arts are useless because they have a gun, I cringe the same way for the same reason.


Martial Arts aren't useless, just that they are not an option for many people and the assertion by Saldana that it is an ALTERNATIVE to being armed is laughable.

For some it is an issue of physical inability and to others it is a matter of priorities. If one can adequately defend themselves with a firearm why force them to pursue other avenues as well or as an alternative?

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 1:55 PM
As for not being capable to learn or use martial arts, that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you decide you can't do it, then you won't. It's good that you are very proficient with a firearm, and I encourage you to learn some form of hand-to-hand combat, if only to explore what you can and cannot do. You may be surprised but what you can achieve if you simply try.


that's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

That's arrogant B.S.

Oh yes, and there's no reason why you can't own the whole world if you try hard enough.

Seriously, some of us are sick. Can you not understand that?

I'm not going to list my medical conditions on the web, but when any repetitive or hard exercise ("hard" to me meaning trivial, probably, to you, repetitive motions such as screwing in a half dozen screws or walking around the mall) often leads to hours of severe and very painful cramps in my hands or legs - cramps that can lead me to lying on the floor unable to get to the shower (hot water is the only relief),

When I used to be able to easily lift and carry 120lb bags of sand or cement, but these days I can hardly lift a quarter of that, when sometimes I put my foot down on the ground and nearly fall over with the explosion of pain, when driving for an hour or two can turn my right leg into a fiery iceball (sounds silly, but it is the best I can describe it) and I have to stop driving, I cannot imagine any martial arts that I could attempt.

This is caused by irreversible nerve and spine damage. Careful eating and drinking and willpower and exercise won't fix that.

I know a few simple throws and counters, not sure if I could do much with them these days unless my assailant was slow and sleepy, especially the one where you double counter a punch by throwing him over your shoulder (landing him on his head if you want to). How high do you have to go up the system (brown belt, black belt?) before you know enough to be of any use? How high do you think I could get these days?

Any suggestions?

Glock22Fan
07-26-2010, 1:59 PM
Martial Arts aren't useless, just that they are not an option for many people and the assertion by Saldana that it is an ALTERNATIVE to being armed is laughable.

For some it is an issue of physical inability and to others it is a matter of priorities. If one can adequately defend themselves with a firearm why force them to pursue other avenues as well or as an alternative?

Exactly!!!!!!!!

frankm
07-26-2010, 1:59 PM
Martial arts can make you a better fighter. This means if you are an old lady, after six months of martial arts, you can beat up a few more old ladies than before your training.
With a gun, that old lady can take on Mike Tyson.

tombinghamthegreat
07-26-2010, 2:12 PM
Hand to hand combat is not useless and could be of some use in some situations but is only meant to be used as a last resort. Doing a round house kick is pointless if you have a switchblade in your gut, your head cracked open from a baseball bat or a bullet in your head.

Not to mention most people are not able to fight off a group of people with no weapons. I doubt a 120 pound female is going to beat up 5 guys trying to rape her nor would a man in their 40's be able to a group of people with just his fists. I doubt i could stop a group of people attacking me despite taking a few years of karate, wrestled in high school and in decent physical condition.

Now a individual with a .38 would have a much better chance of being able to deter, stop or at least be able to flee an attacker(s).

Peaceful John
07-26-2010, 2:14 PM
There's a lot about martial arts I don't know, but this I do know:

01: It is most difficult for an unarmed guy to protect himself against a blade. Back in the mid 1990's I asked my Kung Fu master how to defend against a knife. He said, "Just do your techniques. There is no difference between a knife and a fist". Well, I believed he was telling what he thought true, but my spidey sense said it was wrong. It took nearly two years to find a man who could teach me knife, and I was with him for five years or a bit more before I got my full Guro designation in the art. I discoved that my Kung Fu master was indeed wrong: a man with a knive, especially a skilled man, is formidable indeed, to the point that -- within arm's reach, and against only one or two opponents -- it doesn't make any differnce to the outcome whether you have a knive or a gun. I know, I know. That's probably difficult to believe, but I submit that it's true.

02: A couple of years later I was raised to Master (it's what we call our 8th degree Black: there is no 10th degree Black in our art, instead you are a second year Master) in Kung Fu San Soo. To that point I'd been training, carefully, with young yellow and green belts and, more aggressively, with advanced blacks and masters. Before you ask, you train with fresh blood right off the street because they'll do outrageous things that you'ld never think of. You train with seasoned folks because their bodies are sensitive to small shifts and they can protect themselves from techniques that, if applied against a yellow / green would, ah, reduce their enthusiasm. I learned that mass counts.

In the real world, folks smaller than you don't attack you very often. You're attacked by big guys. Or the male attacks the female. The many assault the few, or the young attack the old. In almost case, many / young / big / males win. That's because they've spent the greater part of their lives in and out of frequent street fights and have learned how to survive. It's also because mass matters. It is very difficult for a 106 lb woman to successfully defend herself against a 250 lb crack addict, pretty much regardless of her unarmed skills.

So to those who say, "Don't carry a gun, just learn karate", I admit that unarmed martial arts can be useful against one or a small number of opponents of approximately the same size, should that pleasing event ever happen to you, but it almost never does. Instead, you are attacked by the many, the young, the big, and the fatherless males. Unarmed martial arts are of little help. Need more data before forming an opinion? If "karate" was the answer to many / young / big / male agression why would they give cops guns? And make them practice?

Cordially,
Peaceful John

frankm
07-26-2010, 2:18 PM
I "mostly" agree with you. Especially the part about white belts being the most dangerous to spar with. But, the streetfighter who takes martial arts becomes deadly indeed. I've known a few who've beat down multiple opponents in street fights. But they're rare. Unless you're one of those, get a gun.

stormy_clothing
07-26-2010, 2:36 PM
martial arts is good for everyone - even if you don't ever use them the ideas they teach can help you keep a cool head and benefit from a developed sense of things, responding to a situation or simply closing the gap between you and an intruder before they can use a gun as alot of people I'm sure have been shot while trying to step back from a situation to bring a gun to bear. - but then what ?

Same with any training though but this one teaches you to make do with the tools you carry all the time.

What martial arts are not as good for as a gun is protecting other people so much.

fnslpmark112
07-26-2010, 2:38 PM
Okay. Everyone that has black lung, crippling paralysis of external body parts, or is so poor that they can't afford food - skip the martial arts training. You have my permission. But, you are still helpless when you don't have your gun. I can't change that for you.

Everyone else would benefit from the experience and training.

CalNRA
07-26-2010, 2:50 PM
Okay. Everyone that has black lung, crippling paralysis of external body parts, or is so poor that they can't afford food - skip the martial arts training. You have my permission.


sounds like a true yuppie.

nemisis1400
07-26-2010, 3:07 PM
"Always cheat, always win, the only unfair advantage is the one you do not have."

If i can't have my rifle, I'll take my shotgun. If i can't have my shotgun, I'll take my handgun. If i can't take my handgun, I'll take my knife. If i can't take my knife, then I'll use my fists.

Steyr_223
07-26-2010, 3:20 PM
"Always cheat, always win, the only unfair advantage is the one you do not have."

If i can't have my rifle, I'll take my shotgun. If i can't have my shotgun, I'll take my handgun. If i can't take my handgun, I'll take my knife. If i can't take my knife, then I'll use my fists.

Yep. Martial arts (unarmed, knives/sticks) and fire arms training were a requirement in my father's household.. Dad was an old Judo guy and I remember as a little kid watching him in the dojo in Oakland. Most martial arts folks that are realists also believe in the 2nd Amendment and firm arms training..Dad believed that martial arts help a person develop good attributes; Self reliance, Honesty, Respect, Compassion and Humility.

Personally I think it has help me in interpersonal communications socially and in the business world.

I feel bad for the folks that have no access to either martial arts or firearms..Since their really just serfs or worst, slaves..And will always be dependent on others (State/Party/Gang) for support.

Stonewalker
07-26-2010, 5:07 PM
So, back to the thread topic:

Do you agree with the statement that, because it is possible to learn martial arts, people should not be allowed to carry handguns?

and/or,

Do you think that people should learn martial arts instead of carrying handguns?

Those are the two arguments that we are trying to counter here.

Several questions have to be answered before you can consider those two.
Heres one.
-How much do you rely on others to take care of you and yours?

Firearms really are the great equalizers. At any time, we can expect that a criminal will carry a firearm walking down the street. How do you defend against a criminal with a firearm? Of course martial arts training is important for close encounters, but a firearm of equal power is an equalizer in an unfair situation. For a government to say that we can't carry the means to defend ourselves is insane and criminal.

I saw an interview with Ted Nugent that stuck with me. He mentions a case where a woman was carjacked and murdered by a repeat offender. He said he would rather her have blown his brains out. I whole-heartedly agree. Who can deny that that would be a better outcome?

Think about this. What if that woman had applied for a CCW but was denied. Does the State have blood on it's hands? I think so.

Let's keep focused on the 2nd Amendment, it has 2 very specific purposes:
-Self-defense of free men
-To make sure our government knows each home has a rifle in it BEFORE they make corrupt decisions or try to use military force internally.

I'm sure there are more, but I'm just starting to study the Constitution and the BoR.

Here's that interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_QjEL0uUgo

Just my humble offerings.

inbox485
07-26-2010, 6:04 PM
Martial Arts aren't useless, just that they are not an option for many people and the assertion by Saldana that it is an ALTERNATIVE to being armed is laughable.

For some it is an issue of physical inability and to others it is a matter of priorities. If one can adequately defend themselves with a firearm why force them to pursue other avenues as well or as an alternative?

I'm not saying either is useless. Quite the contrary, I'm saying that placing a neurotic fixation on one or the other is foolish. I understand some people have physical limitations. I have a few of my own. I choose what adapts best to my condition. With some situational control I can and have managed some pretty nasty situations sans gun. Doesn't mean I wouldn't have given my left nut for a CCW.

I don't question people that say they can't move a certain way. Especially not on an internet forum.

Choosing to defend yourself with just your hands, or just your tool of choice, is like choosing to fight with one hand behind your back. You can do it, but I'd consider it a foolish choice. For the disabled it is like not having the left hand and being told you can't use your right.

Pig Rifle
07-26-2010, 6:34 PM
Chuck Norris sleeps with a pillow under his gun!

TempleKnight
07-26-2010, 7:00 PM
Oh I see! You have a very good point! Although I trained a 64 year old woman for 3 months. She wasn't bad. But she still wouldn't stand a chance against an attacker. I agree with you. It does take a lot of patience and practice for martial arts. If I were disabled and eldery or in a state where i cant apply martial arts I would put my Glocks against anyone. Actually all the professional fighting that i have done has caused ailments in my joints where I feel like Im disabled when i get up in the morning.

I'm 62 and I know what you mean. My joints are not going to let me go all super-ninja on someone twice my size. I can still execute a Mozambique drill fast enough to get my @$$ out of trouble.

dantodd
07-26-2010, 7:31 PM
Everyone else would benefit from the experience and training.

Everyone who has the mental capacity would also benefit from a liberal arts college education. Everyone who hasn't done so would benefit from hiking around the country working day labor and visiting every state so they know what our nation is really made of. Everyone would benefit from taking a survival class where you actually have to stake your life on that knowledge at the end of the course. I think you know where this is going. We could all benefit and enrich our lives in countless ways. But, being human we have to pick and choose those things that are most important and realize that we can't all do EVERYTHING that would be beneficial.

RomanDad
07-26-2010, 7:49 PM
I am 48 years old. 165lbs, 5'10. I have trained in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for 17 years. I often spar with 200lb+, 21 year old kids that watch a bunch of MMA and decide they want to learn it for real. Even at my age, it is like taking candy from a baby. Age is not an excuse.

If you pick the right art, it will benefit you greatly.

And if you get attacked by four people with weapons? Your martial arts training will be worth absolutely ZERO.... A gun may be worth zero as well, but it gives you a much better chance of surviving the encounter.

I was 23 years old when I was attacked. I was 6 foot three.... 240 pounds of NCAA division 1 football player. I had studied Aikido for five years.

I would have traded all of that for a crappy gun and four bullets.


There is nothing anybody can do to guarantee the outcome of a future criminal encounter. The only thing you can do is take actions that can give you a POSSIBILITY of altering the odds. And take it from me... When you need a gun, there is no substitute.

robcoe
07-26-2010, 9:13 PM
15 years of training in Akido and Kempo have taught me that martial arts are great for keeping you fit, disciplined and as a last resort method of self defense.

In general, if a fight comes my way

First I try to avoid it(walk/run away)

If that does not work, first choice to defend myself is a gun, second is a pole weapon(if in a large enough room and I can find one) or knife(if in a confined space, a cutlass would be better, but are hard/illegal to carry)

finaly, if no other options are available I would use hand to hand fighting.

The one fact that sums up the entire "just learn Karate or something" argument from the anti gun people for me is this, Bruce Lee carried a .357 eveywhere he went.

SPaikmos
07-26-2010, 9:45 PM
There's a lot about martial arts I don't know, but this I do know:

01: It is most difficult for an unarmed guy to protect himself against a blade. Back in the mid 1990's I asked my Kung Fu master how to defend against a knife. He said, "Just do your techniques. There is no difference between a knife and a fist". Well, I believed he was telling what he thought true, but my spidey sense said it was wrong. It took nearly two years to find a man who could teach me knife, and I was with him for five years or a bit more before I got my full Guro designation in the art. I discoved that my Kung Fu master was indeed wrong: a man with a knive, especially a skilled man, is formidable indeed, to the point that -- within arm's reach, and against only one or two opponents -- it doesn't make any differnce to the outcome whether you have a knive or a gun. I know, I know. That's probably difficult to believe, but I submit that it's true.

02: A couple of years later I was raised to Master (it's what we call our 8th degree Black: there is no 10th degree Black in our art, instead you are a second year Master) in Kung Fu San Soo. To that point I'd been training, carefully, with young yellow and green belts and, more aggressively, with advanced blacks and masters. Before you ask, you train with fresh blood right off the street because they'll do outrageous things that you'ld never think of. You train with seasoned folks because their bodies are sensitive to small shifts and they can protect themselves from techniques that, if applied against a yellow / green would, ah, reduce their enthusiasm. I learned that mass counts.

In the real world, folks smaller than you don't attack you very often. You're attacked by big guys. Or the male attacks the female. The many assault the few, or the young attack the old. In almost case, many / young / big / males win. That's because they've spent the greater part of their lives in and out of frequent street fights and have learned how to survive. It's also because mass matters. It is very difficult for a 106 lb woman to successfully defend herself against a 250 lb crack addict, pretty much regardless of her unarmed skills.

So to those who say, "Don't carry a gun, just learn karate", I admit that unarmed martial arts can be useful against one or a small number of opponents of approximately the same size, should that pleasing event ever happen to you, but it almost never does. Instead, you are attacked by the many, the young, the big, and the fatherless males. Unarmed martial arts are of little help. Need more data before forming an opinion? If "karate" was the answer to many / young / big / male agression why would they give cops guns? And make them practice?

Cordially,
Peaceful John

IMHO, martial arts provides me a huge advantage over the person I was before I learned it. However, as you attest, it does not give me an advantage over everyone. I agree - a smaller person will not pick a fight with you; it will be someone who sizes you up and decides that you are an easy target for them. Very rarely will someone pick a "fair" fight that they could lose.

I'm curious about your experience with knife fighting. I fully agree that a person who is trained and skilled with a knife will cut any opponent (trained or not) to shreds. However, how do you feel about people that have NOT been trained? Do you feel that your training will help in disarming and fighting such a foe, or do you feel that it is equally useless?

as for the original question - yes, it is ludicrous to replace firearms w/ martial arts. Simply will not work. Agreed on that point. As much as I love martial arts, I realize it doesn't stand a chance against modern warfare. Hence why I am here now.

phish
07-26-2010, 11:01 PM
BLQjntCXz3Q

kcbrown
07-27-2010, 12:41 AM
My reaction time (the time between when something happens and when I take some kind of visual notice of it) is about 1/3 of a second. There's no way martial arts will be able to help me in a self-defense situation. I simply can't react fast enough to avoid or block blows, since the time between the body language that indicates what the blow will be and where it will land and the time it actually lands is almost certainly going to be much less than that -- and the time needed to actually begin moving my body in such a way as to avoid or block the blow will add another 1/4 of a second or so.

Most able-bodied people are able to react about twice as fast as I can.


This is despite the fact that I play a lot of video games that would presumably improve this, so I don't think there's any improvement left to be had.


In fact, this has a significant effect on my ability to rapid fire, since the front sight moves so fast (from my point of view) that I can't tell when it's level again to fire off the next shot, so I have no choice but to wait for it to stabilize and then re-aim prior to firing off another shot. The end result is that my maximum rate of fire for achieving anything approaching "accuracy" (8 inch groups at 10 yards) is about 3 shots every 2 seconds.

EDIT: and no, I don't think it's my base accuracy, since I can get groups of about 4 inches at 25 yards with slow fire (two-handed with no external supports).

E Pluribus Unum
07-27-2010, 1:00 AM
Please God... not another "martial arts is gay" or "My martial art is better than your martial art" thread.

I study traditional shotokan Karate; anyone who hasn't trained in martial arts and says it's useless has an invitation to Kern County to learn otherwise... ;)

pitchbaby
07-27-2010, 1:02 AM
Indiana Jones shot the guy with the swords. Need I say more?

BigDogatPlay
07-27-2010, 2:06 AM
And if you get attacked by four people with weapons? Your martial arts training will be worth absolutely ZERO.... A gun may be worth zero as well, but it gives you a much better chance of surviving the encounter.

I was 23 years old when I was attacked. I was 6 foot three.... 240 pounds of NCAA division 1 football player. I had studied Aikido for five years.

I would have traded all of that for a crappy gun and four bullets.


There is nothing anybody can do to guarantee the outcome of a future criminal encounter. The only thing you can do is take actions that can give you a POSSIBILITY of altering the odds. And take it from me... When you need a gun, there is no substitute.

^^^This^^^

I don't believe that the study and practice of martial arts is worthless any more than I believe the study and practice of defensive weaponcraft is worthless. Both are pieces with which to defend yourself.

I studied judo off and on for a number of years in large part because I felt it was most applicable to my career in law enforcement. And the art came in very handy on many occasions. I've been in a lot more fights than probably 95% of the rest of society. Thankfully I won a whole lot more of them than I lost because I'm still here to talk about it.

But now I am in my 50's with steel in one of my legs, arthritis in my knees and ankles and I just don't get around as well as I used to. There is no way I could physically do the amount of work I know would be required to retain full proficiency even though I remember enough instinctively to respond at least in part to an attack. Let alone being able to devote what little time that a career and family allow. Call me a self fulfilling prophecy all you want... abuse your body all the ways I did all of my life; in sports, at work, and at play, and then come talk to me. I never did anything halfway and I have the scars to show for it.

While I respect anyone who is willing to commit themselves totally to a martial art, I will maintain that it is no replacement for other tools that are readily available in the shed. And I haven't met a martial artist yet who thought he was better than the wrong end of a gun.

press1280
07-27-2010, 2:13 AM
1 on 1 against an unarmed attacker martial arts would come in handy. But, multiple and/or armed attackers, martial arts probably useless unless you're REALLY good and your attackers are pathetic.
I'll stick to the gun thank you very much.

Sunwolf
07-27-2010, 4:44 AM
I just want to become proficient enough in marital arts to take on a couple of swimsuit models.

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 5:25 AM
1 on 1 against an unarmed attacker martial arts would come in handy. But, multiple and/or armed attackers, martial arts probably useless unless you're REALLY good and your attackers are pathetic.
I'll stick to the gun thank you very much.

The art of thinking is officially dead. Yes. A martial art will NOT work against multiple attackers most of the time. That is for the movies. But, it will work against one guy when you don't have your gun.

Listen carefully, YOU CAN HAVE BOTH A GUN AND HAND TO HAND SKILLS. They are not mutually exclusive.

P.S. Roman Dad - Akido is near worthless. There are many, many martial arts that are helpful. Akido is not one of them. Muy Thai, Boxing, Shootfighting, Shotokan, Judo, Sambo, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, kickboxing, Kali, ect... all work. The more peace and love harmony stuff with no realistic sparring will get you hurt.

RomanDad
07-27-2010, 6:13 AM
P.S. Roman Dad - Akido is near worthless.


Now ya tell me.... :(

rattletrap1970
07-27-2010, 6:33 AM
I've studied Martial arts since 1983. Kenpo to be exact. I spent time with Aikido and Tai Chi also. My stance on Martial arts is this, It is to buy me enough time to be able to shoot should I have gotten grabbed in the first place.
I don't want to get in a physical altercation with anyone, I don't know their skill set, their motivation, whether they are armed, or whether they are infected with anything I'd prefer not to have. You get in a fight with someone you are both gonna get opened up some.
So, for whatever reason, you allowed someone to get inside your comfort zone and they lay hands on you, your Martial Arts SHOULD be used to get them off, get some distance, and get your gun out if you didn't get it out beforehand.

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 7:17 AM
Ever since the female Sheriff arbitrarily took my CCW away in California, I am without a gun most of the time. When I travel out of the state or country, I am without a gun all of the time. I suspect there are many, many people in my exact same situation. It just makes sense to have a decent set of fighting skills. It is absolutely amazing someone could make a case against this simple logic.

If you train hard in the martial arts 3-4 times a week, run, lift weights, and stretch on your off days - you will be much better able to deal with the adrenaline dump that happens in a high stress, self defense situation (gun or no gun).

Do both.

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 8:09 AM
Please God... not another "martial arts is gay" or "My martial art is better than your martial art" thread.

I study traditional shotokan Karate; anyone who hasn't trained in martial arts and says it's useless has an invitation to Kern County to learn otherwise... ;)

I don't think that anyone has made the general statement that it is useless. Just that for many of us it is a non-starter.

Some of the arguments here remind me of Marie Antoinette, "Well, if they have no bread, let them eat cake."

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 8:13 AM
Listen carefully, YOU CAN HAVE BOTH A GUN AND HAND TO HAND SKILLS. They are not mutually exclusive.

If you train hard in the martial arts 3-4 times a week, run, lift weights, and stretch on your off days - you will be much better able to deal with the adrenaline dump that happens in a high stress, self defense situation (gun or no gun).

You guys LISTEN CAREFULLY,

SOME OF US JUST CAN'T CONSIDER 'DOING BOTH.'

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 8:18 AM
Glock22fan, LISTEN CAREFULLY, then this conversation does not apply to you! It applies to the other 98.437% of the country that is not physically disabled.

P.S. You are helpless without your gun. Fine. Nothing can be done about it. You have no choice. But, the rest of the population has a choice.

SPaikmos
07-27-2010, 8:36 AM
fnslpmark112, don't waste your breath.
Some people like to wallow in their bitterness and enjoy the attention. Don't feed him.

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 8:50 AM
Glock22fan, LISTEN CAREFULLY, then this conversation does not apply to you! It applies to the other 98.437% of the country that is not physically disabled.

P.S. You are helpless without your gun. Fine. Nothing can be done about it. You have no choice. But, the rest of the population has a choice.

Fine, thank you. But a lot of the posts on here have been attacking all old and disabled people, we are all people who have a choice to make ourselves young and fit again, if only we don't give in to the ravages of time. even a 65 year old woman has learned useful skills, therefore all elderly people can. (and I have to ask myself,yet again, what color belt would she need before she could fend off two or three thugs?) It's just lazyness and a self-fulfilling prophecy that we can't.

I suspect the proportion of the population that can gain little or no benefit from martial arts is waaaaay higher than your 1.563%. And, as one poster said, we can all list all sorts of things that would be good for us if only we had the time and inclination.

All I am trying to do here is tone down the religious attitude that everyone should become a black belt. Some of us can, fine, I have no problem with that. Some of us can't, or don't want to. Why have some of you got a problem with that?

Some of you martial arts experts are already suffering deterioration because of your "art." I hope not, but some of you might be as crippled as me by the time you are my age. I bet you change your minds about the value of Krav Magna or whatever when it is difficult and painful for you to even rise from a chair, like a relative of mine, fifteen years younger than me, who blew out his knee as a Tai Kwando instructor.

The original proposition was that no-one needed a gun because they could learn karate. Can there be any real doubt as to the stupidity and arrogance of that statement? Do 98.457% of us not need a gun 'cos we can learn karate? Come on.

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 8:59 AM
No martial art replaces a gun. Both are necessary to be fully prepared.

Even if you are feeble, arthritic, and old - there is still Tai Chi. You may benefit from that. You won't win the UFC with that art. But, you will achieve better balance, fitness, and learn the principles behind the art. I still contend that most people are capable of far more than they are willing to settle with.

I am 48 years old. Every morning I stretch for 30 minutes. 3-4 nights a week, I train with people 1/2 my age in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Before that, I earned a black belt in Shotokan Karate. On my off nights from Jiu Jitsu, I run 5 miles, do situps, and lift weights. I weigh the exact same as my wrestling weight in high school.

If I can do it, anyone can. I am nothing special. The key is to do what you can. If you are still alive, chances are you are able to do something.

Untamed1972
07-27-2010, 9:11 AM
I just want to become proficient enough in marital arts to take on a couple of swimsuit models.


Isnt that called "playboykido" as taught by grandmaster Hef in the arts of underwear pillow fighting and sneak tickle attacks? LOL

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 9:15 AM
fnslpmark112, don't waste your breath.
Some people like to wallow in their bitterness and enjoy the attention. Don't feed him.

And some like to wallow in their youthful arrogance, writing off anyone who doesn't meet their enhanced view of their own worthiness.

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 9:20 AM
SPaikmos, I think you are right. You just can't help some people. Their mind is their prison.

Youthful arrogance?! I am 48 years old. That is funny!

nick
07-27-2010, 9:47 AM
Some of the things posted here are so ridiculous that I just have to comment.

First, where I'm coming from. I have practiced mostly karate (Shotokan), as well, as a few other martial arts (not as seriously though) since about the age of 3 or so, when my father started teaching me. Unfortunately, I've also seen my share of fights up to highschool, and had a few mugging incidents since then. I've also seen actual combat. So, a few comments on what I've wasted 10 min of my life reading in this thread:

1. Needless to say, the original premise that one should "like uh study karate or something" instead of having the option of using a gun for self-defense is ridiculous on many levels, some of which I'm addressing below. And that's assuming that we're ONLY talking about self-defense when gun rights are concerned.

2. One has to be aware of the limitations of martial arts. Unless your main way of practicing martial arts is watching movies and playing equally demented video games, you have to realize that:

- Constant practice is one of the main requirements. If you can't keep up with the routines, your effectiveness diminishes greatly over time. You might still be better prepared than an average person, but your effectiveness derived from practicing martial arts comes from two main sources - well-rehearsed intuitive moves (which eliminates a lot of conscious thinking out of the equation, thus reducing the reaction time, as well as conditions your muscle memory for the optimal effectiveness of the said moves against the soft spots of the opponent(s)) and physical fitness to back them. The latter diminishes much faster than the former, but both do degrade over time. The older you get (without actively practicing your martial art on a regular basis), the faster they diminish.

There're many reasons why people would stop practicing martial arts. Jobs, starting/running a business, having a family, having other hobbies, you name it. And to be really effective, not just confident without much to back it with (as is too often the case, especially with people who have just started learning martial arts), you have to practice a LOT and frequently. Few people can dedicate their lives to martial arts.

- Contrary to what, once again, movies and video games promote, there're limits to what a well-trained martial arts practitioner can do (and most people dabbing in martial arts aren't well-trained, contrary to their belief). You can't stop a bullet. You can't catch it with your teeth. If you're well-trained and have enough practice in actual engagements, you can (maybe, and it's often a big maybe, not to mention that it depends on your opponent) anticipate your opponent(s) squeezing the trigger and move out of the line of fire. The likelihood of that diminishes with every extra opponent, and with their level of proficiency with their weapons. The same can be said about any engagement, of course, and that's where better weapons mix comes into play. If in addition to your great martial arts skills you also have a gun and know how to use it, your chances improve quite a bit :)

No matter how well-trained you once were, as you get older, those skills, and your physical fitness deteriorate to the point that you become just a bit tougher target for a not-too-well-trained but young and reasonably fit attacker. The same goes for, say, a 110-lbs woman trained in karate vs. a big and reasonably fit (or even not so fit) guy. Your karate training may give you a chance of quickly disabling him or quickly and temporarily disabling him, and running away, but the time is on his side. If he pins you to the ground/wall/etc., your effectiveness is reduced quite dramatically, unless you're in the same league physically. This excludes quite a few people from being able to effectively defend themselves in many situations by learning martial arts.

- Contrary to the movie and video game wisdom, as well as a lot of the things you learn in the controlled environment of a dojo, dealing with more than one, even untrained, attacker isn't very straightforward, or easy, or a sure win if you're well-trained. Of course, your chances are better than those of an untrained person. It's not the same as saying that your chances are good.

- There's much more to say on the subject, but I think I sufficiently made my point by now.

3. If you're in a real hostile situation, you want to engage your opponent at the greatest range possible, thus reducing the danger to yourself. With martial arts (and without other weapons), it means engaging your opponent from roughly the same distance he can engage you from. No good :) A gun increases your reach quite a bit. Martial arts can be a good backup, and do improve your fitness, reaction speed, coordination, etc.

4. Do you know why Europeans adopted firearms even while firearms were still inferior to bows? It took a lifetime to train a good bowman. It took months to train an arquebusier, and the end result wasn't that different. It takes many years to learn martial arts well enough to make a difference. Until then, at best they'll supplement what you already have - your physical strength, speed, whatever experience you already have. What if those aren't your advantages? Say, you're 110lbs, small, don't have that much experience in fighting off opponents? Say, you're old? Say, you're like most of this country's population. However, it doesn't take much to learn how to operate a gun. You don't have to be a competitive shooter to be able to defend yourself with a gun from most attackers. Read the Armed Citizen column in American Rifleman. Most of the people featured there are not exactly well-trained, but they survived the encounter with an attacker.

So, to conclude, the advice to learn karate, once again, makes self-defense available to the select few who have the time, inclination, and ability to learn it, and it's the self-defense with quite a few limitations. Kinda like in Medieval Europe the use of force was largely restricted to those who could afford the weapons, the time to become proficient with weapons, and who thus had the monopoly on force, i.e. aristocracy and professional soldiers.

Firearms, on the other hand, extend this ability to the rest of the population, as they did back in Europe, as well, leading to the demise of aristocracy's monopoly on the use of force.

It's sad that people coming up with some of the opinions I've read in this thread don't bother to learn from History (or study it). After all, most of the situations you can think of have already happened at some point, and the outcome is available for you to study...

nick
07-27-2010, 9:48 AM
No martial art replaces a gun. Both are necessary to be fully prepared.

Even if you are feeble, arthritic, and old - there is still Tai Chi. You may benefit from that. You won't win the UFC with that art. But, you will achieve better balance, fitness, and learn the principles behind the art. I still contend that most people are capable of far more than they are willing to settle with.

I am 48 years old. Every morning I stretch for 30 minutes. 3-4 nights a week, I train with people 1/2 my age in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Before that, I earned a black belt in Shotokan Karate. On my off nights from Jiu Jitsu, I run 5 miles, do situps, and lift weights. I weigh the exact same as my wrestling weight in high school.

If I can do it, anyone can. I am nothing special. The key is to do what you can. If you are still alive, chances are you are able to do something.

So, what do you do for a living, and what are your other hobbies, if any?

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 10:03 AM
Nick, I am an electrical engineer with a wife and two kids - 15 and 17. My other hobbies (besides Jiu Jitsu, weights, and running) are shooting and hunting. I hunt coyote, quail, chukar, dove, and duck.

nick
07-27-2010, 10:25 AM
Nick, I am an electrical engineer with a wife and two kids - 15 and 17. My other hobbies (besides Jiu Jitsu, weights, and running) are shooting and hunting. I hunt coyote, quail, chukar, dove, and duck.

So you have a full-time job, you practice Jiu Jitsu 4 nights a week, run a few miles on the other 3 nights. Am I missing anything so far?

When do you do the rest? When do you spend time with your family?

I'm actually curious, as I've tried to start practicing karate again for about 5 years now (haven't practiced it since my mid-20's), but between my job, training (I'm in IT, so constant training is pretty much a part of the job), family (and I don't even have kids yet), and contracts, I don't have the time for pretty much any hobbies, much less something that takes as much time as practicing karate.

E Pluribus Unum
07-27-2010, 10:31 AM
1 on 1 against an unarmed attacker martial arts would come in handy. But, multiple and/or armed attackers, martial arts probably useless unless you're REALLY good and your attackers are pathetic.
I'll stick to the gun thank you very much.

So what do you do if 4-5 guys attack you?? Throw up your hands and say "OK, kill me"?

Get attacked by 4 guys and try to use sport karate and you will get messed up. Get attacked by 4 guys and take out a couple knees, elbows, and eyes, and the rest usually get deterred. The old adage of pick the biggest guy and mess him up is true; the others wont try to mess with you.

If there is one thing I have learned about street fighting it is that it is never a 1 on 1 fair fight. It's always a guy bigger than you, or a guy and his friends. The study of martial arts CAN BE about guns. I take my gun training as an extension to my martial arts training. I train in hand to hand karate, and weapons which include tonfa, nunchaku, edged weapons AND firearms. As has been said before, why limit yourself?

In my combat arms training (privately funded, not military service), they had a saying: "The only purpose of a handgun, is to shoot your way to a rifle." They say this because rifles are so much more deadly, and accurate than a pistol. We all carry pistols though, don't we.

Anyone who has studied martial arts knows that weapons proficiency applies to ANY object. With my training in nunchaku, I can pick up and wield ANY "swinging" object and use it for defense. This could be a chain, a rope with something tied to the end of it, a sock with a roll of quarters, ANYTHING. With Bo training, one could pick up a pipe, a broom stick, or anything similar. The manual dexterity and strength obtained from martial arts helps with trigger control, recoil, and target acquisition. I have been shooting for many years and I can honestly say that I am a better shot now thanks to martial arts.

Rossi357
07-27-2010, 12:10 PM
Martial .357 center mass works for me.

frankm
07-27-2010, 12:17 PM
I've trained martial arts, MMA, etc. for 25 years, I hold multiple ranks, nuf said. I don't have to fistfight nobody. Why should I get hurt?

I choose gunfu. :25:

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 12:31 PM
Nick, I am really not that busy.

My son hunts with me. He started hunting and shooting when he was 8. Conservatively, we have been on hundreds of hunts together. I go backpacking in the Sierras and fishing with them at least twice a year. My son and I played paintball at least once of month at SC Village for six years. My daughter and I go to the mall or dinner together all the time. I have been told I am one of the most involved, best dads many people know. Now that they are older, they are with their friends more. So, I get a lot of my personal time back. I have been married for 21 years. We go to movies and dinner all the time.

I am home from work at 5:00 each day. I hang out with the family. Then, go to Jiu Jitsu right up the street from 7:00-8:30 some nights. I am back home by 8:45pm. They have Sat/Sun classes too. My schedule is flexible. I shoot for 3x per week. 4x every once in a while. On the off nights, running 5 miles does not take long. I have weights at home. It just depends what is going on.

It is all manageable from my end.

RomanDad
07-27-2010, 12:59 PM
Lets bring this back to the topic at hand....

I haven't yet seen the video for this event, But I have little doubt that the FEMALE attorney who said this, could take Karate until the cows come home, and I, as a 6 foot three, 240 pound man am physically big and strong enough that I could overpower her with very little risk to myself (If I were a criminal.... Which Im not.- Just saying for the record.).

On the other hand, if she pulled out a gun and pointed it at my chest, she wins. Every single time.

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 1:10 PM
Nick, I am really not that busy.

My son hunts with me. He started hunting and shooting when he was 8. Conservatively, we have been on hundreds of hunts together. I go backpacking in the Sierras and fishing with them at least twice a year. My son and I played paintball at least once of month at SC Village for six years. My daughter and I go to the mall or dinner together all the time. I have been told I am one of the most involved, best dads many people know. Now that they are older, they are with their friends more. So, I get a lot of my personal time back. I have been married for 21 years. We go to movies and dinner all the time.

I am home from work at 5:00 each day. I hang out with the family. Then, go to Jiu Jitsu right up the street from 7:00-8:30 some nights. I am back home by 8:45pm. They have Sat/Sun classes too. My schedule is flexible. I shoot for 3x per week. 4x every once in a while. On the off nights, running 5 miles does not take long. I have weights at home. It just depends what is going on.

It is all manageable from my end.

I am impressed.

I finish work between 5:30 and 6:00. Then I feed the dogs and the cats, clean out water bowls and that sort of thing. Then I cook a meal for my sick wife and myself. I try to make this something rather more than a nuked TV dinner, so after we eat and I wash up it's getting on for eight, and I am shattered. Sometimes I collapse with a book by the TV for an hour or two, then I clean the cat boxes, the dog's water bowls (again), get the dogfood ready for breakfast and go to bed. Sometimes, I am in bed by eight - frequently after taking painkillers so I'll get to sleep. Sometimes I stay up much later to spend time with my wife who (because of pain) is often not in bed until 3:00 or 4:00. I pay for this lack of sleep later. (The other day, without chemical aid, my body slept for sixteen hours straight off.) The dogs wake me between 5:00 and 6:00 for their breakfast.

At the weekend, it is driving fifteen miles to the nearest store for groceries, and most weekends it is either a Costco trip, or a petshop trip or some other errand. Usually I am back by three for some housework; vacuuming or cleaning. The other weekend day it is laundry and yard work - mowing the lawn etc (not easy with hip pain like mine but we're off the beaten track and there are no gardeners going around). And, of course, the cats, the dogs and the wife still need looking after.

About the only chance I get to do something for myself is the hour or so reading/watching t.v. in the evening and sneaking out to the back 40 for 30 minutes to pop a few caps. Oh, and I've managed two hunting trips in the last four years.

Over the last ten years I've gradually had to cut out sailing, ocean fishing, horseback riding, hiking, swimming and just about every other activity just to keep ahead of the essentials of life.

I'm actually not bitter about this - life is what it is and s*** happens.

You have it relatively good. Good luck to you and I hope it lasts.

What I get bitter about is people who haven't lived my life telling me how I should live my life by their rules, clearly with absolutely no understand how impossible that is.

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 1:11 PM
Lets bring this back to the topic at hand....

I haven't yet seen the video for this event, But I have little doubt that the FEMALE attorney who said this, could take Karate until the cows come home, and I, as a 6 foot three, 240 pound man am physically big and strong enough that I could overpower her with very little risk to myself (If I were a criminal.... Which Im not.- Just saying for the record.).

On the other hand, if she pulled out a gun and pointed it at my chest, she wins. Every single time.

Just so.

GuyW
07-27-2010, 1:12 PM
....your effectiveness .....comes from two main sources - well-rehearsed intuitive moves (which eliminates a lot of conscious thinking out of the equation, thus reducing the reaction time, as well as conditions your muscle memory for the optimal effectiveness of the said moves against the soft spots of the opponent(s)) and physical fitness to back them.


Quoted as to applicability from epee sport fencing. Timing, quickness, hand-eye coordination, muscle-memory, footwork, etc etc. Oh - and hours of training and bouting every week (3-5 days typically)

My 18 yo A-rated son should start carrying a rapier: 32" - 36" of reach....

...until he can have a CCW...
.

fnslpmark112
07-27-2010, 1:48 PM
"I haven't yet seen the video for this event, But I have little doubt that the FEMALE attorney who said this, could take Karate until the cows come home, and I, as a 6 foot three, 240 pound man am physically big and strong enough that I could overpower her with very little risk to myself (If I were a criminal.... Which Im not.- Just saying for the record.)"


Roman Dad, my experience makes me think like you. I have only had two girls that have ever beat me in the fighting realm (I am sure there are more). Both of them were World Champion Jiu Jitsu competitors. Girls can improve their fighting skills and would benefit greatly from training. A trained female grappler against a untrained "dude" will have a chance. But, I would recommend strongly a female carry a gun. Size, strength, and testosterone matter.

inbox485
07-27-2010, 1:59 PM
The art of thinking is officially dead.

This is the problem not the solution...

Yes. A martial art will NOT work against multiple attackers most of the time.

Mindset and prudent situational control fixes most of that. I don't have a link handy, but there is a great YT vid of a guy pummeling about 6 different guys at once.

That is for the movies. But, it will work against one guy when you don't have your gun.

It will also work when your gun won't. There are lots of situations where your gun is not only little to no help, but a major liability.

Listen carefully, YOU CAN HAVE BOTH A GUN AND HAND TO HAND SKILLS. They are not mutually exclusive.

Tools are tools. You can use the tools you have or be the tool yourself. ;)

P.S. Roman Dad - Akido is near worthless.
To which variety do you refer? I'm being a nit pick here cause I agree for the most part, but if you can find one of the old school guys from before it became the art of farting rainbows so memorizing that your karma would convince your assailant to throw himself, aikido can be about as good as any stand up fight method gets. If you can sort out the granola munching hippy crap, the principles of aikido are valuable if nothing else.

There are many, many martial arts that are helpful. Akido is not one of them. Muy Thai, Boxing, Shootfighting, Shotokan, Judo, Sambo, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, kickboxing, Kali, ect... all work. The more peace and love harmony stuff with no realistic sparring will get you hurt.

Funny, you listed about every style short of TDK that has fatal flaws built into their traditions. Just a passing thought, don't mind me.

inbox485
07-27-2010, 2:02 PM
Lets bring this back to the topic at hand....

I haven't yet seen the video for this event, But I have little doubt that the FEMALE attorney who said this, could take Karate until the cows come home, and I, as a 6 foot three, 240 pound man am physically big and strong enough that I could overpower her with very little risk to myself (If I were a criminal.... Which Im not.- Just saying for the record.).

On the other hand, if she pulled out a gun and pointed it at my chest, she wins. Every single time.

And heaven help her if the guy has so much as played grabass with fighters at the gym.

San FranPsycho
07-27-2010, 2:11 PM
I am pretty late to this discussion but if I had used a gun every time I have been in a fight in my life, I would be locked up for a long long time. Not every situation that leads to a physical confrontation is a justifiable one for using a firearm.

What if someone breaks into your house, he's unarmed, and hes running down the street with your valuables and possessions? You can't shoot him, but it would be a lot harder and less likely to charge you for anything if you just chased him down and beat his ***.

winnre
07-27-2010, 2:14 PM
I think the words "Just learn karate" can only be told to Chuck Norris.

Glock22Fan
07-27-2010, 3:10 PM
I am pretty late to this discussion but if I had used a gun every time I have been in a fight in my life, I would be locked up for a long long time. Not every situation that leads to a physical confrontation is a justifiable one for using a firearm.

What if someone breaks into your house, he's unarmed, and hes running down the street with your valuables and possessions? You can't shoot him, but it would be a lot harder and less likely to charge you for anything if you just chased him down and beat his ***.

Well, there you are then. As I'd have no chance of catching anyone running down the street, I don't need to be able to kick his a**.

As far as all this "getting in a fight" is concerned, you must all be pugnacious critters, either looking for trouble or unable to see it coming. I don't think I've had any kind of physical altercation since I was fifteen, over fifty years ago.

dantodd
07-27-2010, 3:24 PM
What if someone breaks into your house, he's unarmed, and hes running down the street with your valuables and possessions? You can't shoot him, but it would be a lot harder and less likely to charge you for anything if you just chased him down and beat his ***.

That is still assault. As much as you may like proving how big a man you are by beating someone else up it is against the law to attack someone when they are not a threat to you or other people. Chase him down and take your stuff back, fine but posting here that you would then "beat his ***" is essentially stating that you would commit assault against someone who is not an imminent threat to you.

inbox485
07-27-2010, 3:25 PM
Get attacked by 4 guys and try to use sport karate and you will get messed up. Get attacked by 4 guys and take out a couple knees, elbows, and eyes, and the rest usually get deterred. The old adage of pick the biggest guy and mess him up is true; the others wont try to mess with you.


A few phrases come to mind:

- the mind f#$@ comes before the body f@#$
- there can be 1 or 100, but if all parties know that first man up goes to the morgue, you probably won't have much of a fight
- You can score points all the way to the morgue or you can get DQ'd for sending the other guy to the morgue
- Fair fights are the direct result of poor planning
- If you think legal liability is potentially expensive, give some thought to medical bills and the potential of becoming a prisoner in your own body

RomanDad
07-27-2010, 3:29 PM
What if someone breaks into your house,

He must be there to harm me or my family.... Im in fear for my life... He gets shot right there.

Decoligny
07-27-2010, 3:30 PM
that's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

That's arrogant B.S.

Oh yes, and there's no reason why you can't own the whole world if you try hard enough.

Seriously, some of us are sick. Can you not understand that?

I'm not going to list my medical conditions on the web, but when any repetitive or hard exercise ("hard" to me meaning trivial, probably, to you, repetitive motions such as screwing in a half dozen screws or walking around the mall) often leads to hours of severe and very painful cramps in my hands or legs - cramps that can lead me to lying on the floor unable to get to the shower (hot water is the only relief),

When I used to be able to easily lift and carry 120lb bags of sand or cement, but these days I can hardly lift a quarter of that, when sometimes I put my foot down on the ground and nearly fall over with the explosion of pain, when driving for an hour or two can turn my right leg into a fiery iceball (sounds silly, but it is the best I can describe it) and I have to stop driving, I cannot imagine any martial arts that I could attempt.

This is caused by irreversible nerve and spine damage. Careful eating and drinking and willpower and exercise won't fix that.

I know a few simple throws and counters, not sure if I could do much with them these days unless my assailant was slow and sleepy, especially the one where you double counter a punch by throwing him over your shoulder (landing him on his head if you want to). How high do you have to go up the system (brown belt, black belt?) before you know enough to be of any use? How high do you think I could get these days?

Any suggestions?

I agree with you totally. I have learned some martial arts techniques over the years. I currently have herniated disks in my neck, inner ear problems that effect my balance with quick lateral movements, arthritis in my shoulder, a bad knee, and an ankle that has had bone removed from it.

I am able to stay in shape only because I can ride a stationary bicycle.

Rolling around practicing jui jitsu would cause irrepairable spinal injury. Sparring could lead to permanent paralysis or death.

My layering for SD involves my cane, my knife, and hopefully someday my legally CCW'd gun.

RomanDad
07-27-2010, 3:33 PM
That is still assault. As much as you may like proving how big a man you are by beating someone else up it is against the law to attack someone when they are not a threat to you or other people. Chase him down and take your stuff back, fine but posting here that you would then "beat his ***" is essentially stating that you would commit assault against someone who is not an imminent threat to you.

Maybe.... Maybe not.... You are privileged to use REASONABLE (non lethal) physical force to stop a crime in progress. You CAN chase the burglar.... You should probably start by screaming "HEY... Give me my crap back!" If he doesnt you can use as much NONLETHAL physical force as it takes to make him stop. Once he surrenders, you cant keep kicking his ***. You have to use the LEAST amount of force possible to stop the crime.

dantodd
07-27-2010, 3:38 PM
Maybe.... Maybe not.... You are privileged to use REASONABLE (non lethal) force to stop a crime in progress. You CAN chase the burglar.... You should probably start by screaming "HEY... Give me my crap back!" If he doesnt you can use as much NONLETHAL force as it takes to make him stop. Once he surrenders, you cant keep kicking his ***.

Saying "chased him down and beat his ***" is a far cry from saying "chased him down and took my stuff back." In the latter case you'd almost certainly want a firearm available as he could easily produce a weapon you didn't see when he was in your house.

FunkBass
07-27-2010, 4:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuigcXvcy1A

Sgt5811
07-27-2010, 4:46 PM
I don't think that they are useless, but they are only suited for some people. For those many of us who cannot do the practice, including the elderly and disabled, they are next to useless.

However, you have to be really disabled to be unable to pull a trigger.

Guns are easier to learn, do not take the hours and hours of dedicated practice (unless you really want to be top shooter), are suited to far more people and have a much longer range.

I don't care how good you are at whatever martial art you like, I'll back my Glock or 1911 at ten plus yards against you. And I am over 65 and am registered as disabled.

Just ask Indiana Jones how to tackle a whirling dervish with swords in both hands.

I'll take your bet and raise you .45! IT has been proven that a reasonably quick opponent can close the distance from up to 21 feet before you can even draw your weapon. That being said, we have a little something called a "reactionary gap" or "buffer zone" to which a little bit of situational awareness can keep an adversary away. Being realistic here, we can't always keep everyone 21 feet away (believe me I try), so sometimes you are SOL. A little bit of hands on never hurts...too little. If you plan on being prepared, training should be well rounded. That means armed and unarmed. And if you're 73 years old and can only shoot a gun, you would probably be better off staying away from the bad guys, or at home..preferably not behind the wheel of a car...or on a rascal holding up traffic with your newfound mobility...or...:eek:

G60
07-27-2010, 6:10 PM
pfff. this is the first thing that comes to mind when i think people suggest 'just learn karate'

http://static.funnyjunk.com/gifs/482_indiana_jones_knife_lol_gun_shoot0.gif

Crazed_SS
07-27-2010, 6:36 PM
I doubt the anti-gunners are serious when they tell you to "just learn karate".. They're not that dumb. When they say "learn karate", they're basically discounting your fears about being a victim of violent crime. The thinking is having a gun is just a useless as karate since you'll never use either.

KylaGWolf
07-27-2010, 6:46 PM
.
http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/32053-4/wheelchair8396.jpg

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/30073-4/nominalprey7307.jpg

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/29301-4/karate5720.jpg

JD exactly. Even though I do know some self defense in all honesty unless I am having a really good day none of it will do me a bit of good if I am attacked. I can't trust my one arm to have any strength what so ever and even when it does there is no promise that it will not lose it just as quick. I also can't run or kick like I once could. That is why I get upset every time someone says oh just take self defense, use pepper spray or get a taser.

I have seen people get hit with the last two and keep moving like nothing happened. Sorry if they get close enough for me to use those last two options and they fail I might as well kiss it goodbye.

Pont
07-27-2010, 6:54 PM
For starters, everyone here agrees that martial arts are not a substitute for firearms.

I think anyone intending to be able to defend themselves with a firearm should take a martial art that involves sparring or grappling if at all possible. ESPECIALLY if you don't hunt. Shooting at targets is one thing, but a "real" martial art will let you train your mind to be aggressive when it needs to be. That, in turn, will help you pull and shoot with decisiveness when the time comes without feeling the need to draw and brandish prematurely.

The Director
07-27-2010, 7:12 PM
Second degree black belt here. 6'-3", 225#, meet current Army PT standards for my age.

I'll take the gun every time, please and thank you.

advocatusdiaboli
07-27-2010, 7:27 PM
So, back to the thread topic:

Do you agree with the statement that, because it is possible to learn martial arts, people should not be allowed to carry handguns?

and/or,

Do you think that people should learn martial arts instead of carrying handguns?

Those are the two arguments that we are trying to counter here.

Ask them if they have heard of the Empire of Japan whose proud samurai elevated edged weapon warfare and discipline to heights never before (and probably never will be again) seen on Earth and did not use firearms until they encountered those (Westerners) who did. Then they rapidly adopted them. If edged weapons and hand combat were a perfect substitute, they would not have endured the horrendous social upheaval created by adopting firearms and the waning of Bushido and their arts of war that had endured for centuries--many opposed this wrenching social change. There is only one logical conclusion? They felt firearms superior when facing edged weapons and hand combat and to prevail in battle they felt they had no choice but to adopt firearms. Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it. Case closed.

Gryff
07-27-2010, 9:52 PM
Karate's what you do until you can get clear enough to draw your gun.

E Pluribus Unum
07-28-2010, 1:07 AM
Karate's what you do until you can get clear enough to draw your gun.

...or when draconian gun laws have made it impossible to practically carry one.

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 7:17 AM
Reply to a query concerning the suitability of T'ai Chi for someone like me.


Dear John,

Thank you for your enquiry.

Tai Chi, while generally an incredbile exercise for health, is also strenuous (in slow motion). It requires really good knees and a strong lower back. Of course, it will help anyone gain more balance and strength but under certain health conditions, it can aggravate more than help.

While I'd love to have you as a student, I think your first step might be better to take lessons in a very low impact, gentle Yoga.

Master Baird


So much for "Anyone can do T'ai chi," although he does say that maybe later, after I gained more strength, it might be a possibility. However, I know that my lack of strength is a factor of irreversible nerve damage.

I'd like to see someone using lotus position to fight off a bad guy!

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 7:24 AM
Glock22fan, you are killing me dude.

Resolve yourself to improving your physical condition. Then, take positive steps towards that goal. You won't find the answer on the internet. Get up and go watch a Tai Chi class. If that is too strenuous (I can't imagine how it could be), watch and/or take a yoga class. Do something beside telling yourself you can't do it.

You are not dead yet. Age is largely in a persons head. You are capable of more than you are currently demanding of yourself. Any positive step forward is an improvement.

P.S. Or, you can keep attacking us that are trying to help you.

advocatusdiaboli
07-28-2010, 7:24 AM
There is no doubt that physical conditioning adds capability to one's defense and the martial arts add both conditioning and physical skills that are likely to prove useful in defense situations where there is no direct involvement of firearms. As for their applicability in encounters involving primarily the use of firearms, besides the history lesson on the Empire of Japan I wrote above, there is this quote.

"Bushido is all very well in it's way, but it is no match for a 30-06"
- Jeff Cooper

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 7:40 AM
Glock22fan, you are killing me dude.

Resolve yourself to improving your physical condition. Then, take positive steps towards that goal. You won't find the answer on the internet. Get up and go watch a Tai Chi class. If that is too strenuous (I can't imagine how it could be), watch and/or take a yoga class. Do something beside telling yourself you can't do it.

You are not dead yet. Age is largely in a persons head. You are capable of more than you are currently demanding of yourself. Any positive step forward is an improvement.

P.S. Or, you can keep attacking us that are trying to help you.

I'm not attacking anyone. I'm trying to act as advocate, using my personal circumstances, for those of us (several of whom have posted on this board) who find the suggestion that everyone can study martial arts to the extent that they stand any chance of success over any fit thug under the age of 60 to be ludicrous on irreversible health and other grounds.

"All you have to do is eat right and exercise!" you say.
"I know someone aged 90 who does it, therefore everyone can" you say.
"98.999% of the population can do it" you say.

"B.S." is my response.

If you are trying to help me personally, instead of pushing your own agenda, thank you - but please stop.

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 8:04 AM
Glock22fan - you are hopeless. If you spent a fraction of the energy you spent whining actually doing something, you would have a chance.

Some people you just can't reach.

motorhead
07-28-2010, 8:38 AM
oh mergatroid! that's friggin hilarious. i was expecting something like, "my chinese kung fu is better than your romanian ak 47".

inbox485
07-28-2010, 8:57 AM
Maybe.... Maybe not.... You are privileged to use REASONABLE (non lethal) physical force to stop a crime in progress. You CAN chase the burglar.... You should probably start by screaming "HEY... Give me my crap back!" If he doesnt you can use as much NONLETHAL physical force as it takes to make him stop. Once he surrenders, you cant keep kicking his ***. You have to use the LEAST amount of force possible to stop the crime.

I'm not willing to pop a melon over something an insurance company will replace, but lets not say it is illegal. IMO it isn't even wrong.

PC 197:
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person,
against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or
surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends
and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter
the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any
person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a
wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such
person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to
commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent
danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the
person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant
or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have
endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was
committed; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and
means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in
lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving
the peace.

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 10:36 AM
against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or
surprise, to commit a felony,
The felony has alrady been committed and no way can you say that a person fleeing the scene intends or is endeavoring to commit any further acts of violence or surprise.

It is well known that you must not use deadly force (and one of these super black belt artists surely is capable of this, whether the end result is death or not) against a fleeing person.

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 10:50 AM
Glock22fan - you are hopeless. If you spent a fraction of the energy you spent whining actually doing something, you would have a chance.

With my G22 or 1911, I think I have a very good chance of doing something. With martial arts, I think I'd be wasting energy whistling in the wind.

Some people you just can't reach.

You said it! I'm going to quit this argument, as you simply keep ignoring simple facts and keep repeating yourself.



You are determined to have the last word, so let me summarize it for you:

Everyone can learn martial arts to the point where it is substantially useful when attacked by someone, no matter how old or disabled they may be.

Everyone can find a couple of hours a day to go to the dojo or take a five mile run, no matter how old or disabled they are and no matter how much housework they have to fit in after work (was it you who listed everything they did and mentioned nothing about helping your wife with the dishes, or maintaining the car/yard or running errands?)

A firearm is useless to the elderly/disabled unless they have the combat mindset that comes from being a black belt artist.

Anyone who claims that they are sick and unable to stand in strange postures for an hour is a whiner who doesn't deserve all the help being offered by over-aged jocks.


Thank you, and goodbye.

N6ATF
07-28-2010, 11:02 AM
LMFAO :owned:

E Pluribus Unum
07-28-2010, 12:09 PM
The felony has alrady been committed and no way can you say that a person fleeing the scene intends or is endeavoring to commit any further acts of violence or surprise.

It is well known that you must not use deadly force (and one of these super black belt artists surely is capable of this, whether the end result is death or not) against a fleeing person.

Deadly force is warranted against a fleeing person when it is reasonable to assume that the fleeing felon represents a future danger to others.

Car thief shoots someone, drops the gun and runs away, no deadly force warranted.

Car thief shoots someone, and runs away with the gun towards a populated area, deadly force warranted even if shot in the back while running away.

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 12:13 PM
Glock22fan - Your biggest handicap is your mind. If you fix your mind, you can fix your body.

Quite frankly, if I had your attitude and life, I would not worry about defending it. What would be the point? Nothing to save. But, that is your choice.

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 12:28 PM
Glock22fan - Your biggest handicap is your mind. If you fix your mind, you can fix your body.

Quite frankly, if I had your attitude and life, I would not worry about defending it. What would be the point? Nothing to save. But, that is your choice.

This really will be my last comment.

You bear out exactly what I said earlier. Arrogance of youth (even if you are a 48 y.o. jock). If you are too old or too sick to study martial arts, you are worthless: let's exterminate the lot of you.

Glock22Fan
07-28-2010, 12:30 PM
Deadly force is warranted against a fleeing person when it is reasonable to assume that the fleeing felon represents a future danger to others.

Car thief shoots someone, drops the gun and runs away, no deadly force warranted.

Car thief shoots someone, and runs away with the gun towards a populated area, deadly force warranted even if shot in the back while running away.

I'd hate to be a civilian defending this charge.

San FranPsycho
07-28-2010, 12:36 PM
That is still assault. As much as you may like proving how big a man you are by beating someone else up it is against the law to attack someone when they are not a threat to you or other people. Chase him down and take your stuff back, fine but posting here that you would then "beat his ***" is essentially stating that you would commit assault against someone who is not an imminent threat to you.

It *could* be assault. I KNOW for a FACT of incidents where this has happened, and the cops were very reasonable and nobody was going to press charges on the guy who chased down the robber.

We do live in CA, the law is pretty shtty sometimes, but a lot of people still thankfully use common sense. If you chase someone down in your PJs down the street, tackle them, rough them up a bit and hold them for the cops, and it is made known that you did this INSTEAD of grab your gun, it is really unlikely any kinds of charges will be made against you.

I mean if you curbstomp the guy after catching him yeah, that's not good, but lets be reasonable here.

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 12:41 PM
Glock22fan, your attitude of victimization is what makes me question what is worth defending. You are not too old or too sick. You are too bitter and too set in your destructive ways.

N6ATF
07-28-2010, 12:48 PM
http://junkspace.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Dalek-costume-brown.jpg

"Exterminate old humans!"

kcbrown
07-28-2010, 1:05 PM
Glock22fan - Your biggest handicap is your mind. If you fix your mind, you can fix your body.


Ah, yes. The old "the mind makes anything possible!" mantra.

Sorry, but this is the real world. In the real world, physical incapability wins over willpower (if you are physically incapable of doing something, no amount of willpower will magically change that. Technology might, though), the laws of physics (which form the basis of everything that happens in the world) reign supreme and absolute, and everything has a cost.

Irreversible damage is irreversible damage. I cite Christopher Reeve as proof positive of this. His attitude after his injuries was exactly what yours is. It didn't help him a bit, and he's dead now despite his overwhelmingly positive attitude.

The real world wins over positive attitudes every time unless what is being attempted really is possible. My point being that the real world cares nothing at all about positive attitudes. Whether an attempt succeeds or fails has nothing to do with attitude and everything to do with what is being attempted, how it's being attempted, and the circumstances it's being attempted in.

You are assuming that Glock22Fan hasn't already tried to do the things you're suggesting in one form or other, only to discover that the real costs (remember, everything has a cost) vastly outweigh the supposed benefits.

You sound like one of the anti-gunners who thinks that "if we could just get rid of all the guns, everything would be peachy!" -- you're essentially saying that "if you only put your mind to it, everything will be peachy!". Reality eventually smacks the people who follow such advice upside the head.


Sorry, but in the battle between you and the real world, my bet is on the real world. It's always won in the past...

BlindRacer
07-28-2010, 1:18 PM
Glock22fan, your attitude of victimization is what makes me question what is worth defending. You are not too old or too sick. You are too bitter and too set in your destructive ways.

I've got to go with Glock22fan here. Not everyone can just get healthy and fit. It's not always possible. There's problems that are irreversible, and can cause serious issues with learning, and being fluent in any martial art, to the point that you can't fend off an attacker.

Looking at me, you'd see a 27 year old, healthy and fit 5' 10", 150 pound, male. You'd think that I could easily learn and do anything I wanted at this point. Without getting into details, that's not the case. Peoples' bodies fall apart, and you can't just reverse something by eating right and exercising. I eat healthy for the most part, have low body fat, and exercise as much as my body allows me to (which isn't much).

Anyways, even if I were to somehow learn a martial art, my body would be very limiting once it was put into use against an attacker.

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 1:20 PM
Yes. The mind is not all powerful. Willpower alone is not enough. And, No. You can't do everything you want "if you just believe".

Conversely, a persons mind (attitude) can hold them back if they don't think right. He is not Christopher Reeves. He sent an email to a Tai Chi person and got a vague response that Tai Chi might be too hard. So, he gave up.

He is too proud to admit that he is his own worst enemy. It is easier to make excuses than actually try to do something.

faterikcartman
07-28-2010, 1:23 PM
Kcbrown I really like your post.

I think martial arts can give a false sense of security to women and wimps.

That said, I have successfully used martial arts in self-defence in six real fights as an adult. On the other hand, I was one of Glock22's "young jocks". Several guys were much bigger and stronger than me -- BUT, I was still relatively big and strong myself. I don't know if it would be possible to use joint manipulation to pin a strong 200 pound attacker's face to the ground if I was very weak and had arthritic hands. Knowing how to do something is not the same as being able to do it.

Regardless, here is all you need to know:
http://www.realultimatepower.net/index4.htm

Decoligny
07-28-2010, 1:23 PM
Glock22fan, your attitude of victimization is what makes me question what is worth defending. You are not too old or too sick. You are too bitter and too set in your destructive ways.

Have you EVER dealt with anyone who has IRREVERSABLE nerve damage?

It has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with how strong you can get your muscle.
It has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with how much will power you have.
It has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with how much of any particular exercise you do.

What it does have to do with is the body's inability to send messages from the brain in order to get the body to do what the brain wants it to do.

When you try to make a fist and only your pinky is able to bend it doesn't matter how much you try.

When you have a strong bicep, but the message from the brain to move your arm doesn't get to the bicep, it doesn't matter how strong the muscle is.

You don't seem to get it. There ARE indeed SOME people who CANNOT perform certain physical activities, EVER. No matter how hard they try.

You really need to visit some hospitals that deal with peripheral neuropathy and other degenerative nerve disorders. You would learn a thing or two about the real world and the limitations that some real people have to learn to live with.

Glock22fan is the only person who truly knows his own abilities and disabilities. Yet you choose to put forth that his mind is his only limitation. If he knows that his back CANNOT take a certain activity, why should he attempt that activity? He inquired about Tai Chi and received an answer that stated it required a certain amount of back strength. He made the call that he did not have that amount of back strength. Who the hell are you to tell him that he doesn't know his own limitations?

Try telling Stephen Hawking to take up Brazilian Jiu Jistsu and see how long it takes him to master the simplest technique. :rolleyes:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00441/news-graphics-2007-_441537a.jpg

faterikcartman
07-28-2010, 1:25 PM
By the way, wasn't Chris Reeves able to suck the stem cells out of the necks of fetuses and grow so strong he could throw a car at Gene Hackman? Maybe anything is possible.

kcbrown
07-28-2010, 1:38 PM
It is easier to make excuses than actually try to do something.

Yes, it is easier. But it is also better sometimes.

Remember: everything has a cost, including "trying to do something".

You assume that he hasn't tried to do something similar in the past, only to discover that the costs were far higher than the payoff. I won't make such an assumption as that. In fact, I'd say based on his responses here that this is exactly what is driving his viewpoint.

The response he got from the Tai Chi instructor is, essentially, that it is demanding on the knees and back (else it wouldn't require that they be in excellent condition). If it happens that his knees make it difficult for him to do something as straightforward as get up out of a chair, what in the world would lead him to believe that Tai Chi will help him?

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 1:44 PM
Okay. You guys win. Sit on the couch. Eat french fries and ding dongs all day. Keep telling yourself "I can't do any better than I am doing now". Then, please report back to me in a decade. Send before and after photos. I can't wait to see how your "plan" works for you.

Joe
07-28-2010, 1:52 PM
Okay. You guys win. Sit on the couch. Eat french fries and ding dongs all day. Keep telling yourself "I can't do any better than I am doing now". Then, please report back to me in a decade. Send before and after photos. I can't wait to see how your "plan" works for you.

Yes, that is exactly what everyone else is advocating :rolleyes:

Decoligny
07-28-2010, 1:58 PM
Okay. You guys win. Sit on the couch. Eat french fries and ding dongs all day. Keep telling yourself "I can't do any better than I am doing now". Then, please report back to me in a decade. Send before and after photos. I can't wait to see how your "plan" works for you.

Good God what a warped view of reality you seem to have. Each of us does what he/she can. I have herniated disks, so I don't do the rough and tumble stuff anymore. Why, because I don't want to end up paralyzed. That doesn't mean that I don't do what I can do.

For all you know Glock22fan might stay in shape by swimming laps. Because someone cannot take the physical demands that martial arts put on a body does not mean that the individual who can't do martial arts is a lump of useless fat sitting in front of a television waiting to die.

I can't run due to a bone being surgically removed from my ankle. It cannot take the impact.

I can't wrestle due to my disks being herniated. They cannot take the impact.

I have also had bone surgically removed from my shoulder which puts other range of motion issues into the mix.

I ride a stationary bike for exercise because of inner ear problems that cause issues with balance and keep me off a real bike. I ride an average of 12 miles a day, have a resting heartrate of 56, and have dropped a total of 35 lbs of fat in the last 6 months.

I can swim, I can ride the bike, I can keep my muscle strength with the use of dumbbells.

So take your holier than thou attitude and stuff it very deeply into the darkest recesses of your nearest Dojo.

Decoligny
07-28-2010, 2:02 PM
Okay. You guys win. Sit on the couch. Eat french fries and ding dongs all day. Keep telling yourself "I can't do any better than I am doing now". Then, please report back to me in a decade. Send before and after photos. I can't wait to see how your "plan" works for you.

This guy is very good. 20 posts and 18 of them are in this thread, all trying to induce the most visceral responses possible.

I have fallen victim to a

http://kimgrahamstudios.com/images/troll-15.jpg

TROLL

N6ATF
07-28-2010, 2:29 PM
Looking at me, you'd see a 27 year old, healthy and fit 5' 10", 150 pound, male. You'd think that I could easily learn and do anything I wanted at this point. Without getting into details, that's not the case. Peoples' bodies fall apart, and you can't just reverse something by eating right and exercising. I eat healthy for the most part, have low body fat, and exercise as much as my body allows me to (which isn't much).

Heh, a little older, a little lighter, and a little shorter, otherwise I'd think you were describing me.

Steyr_223
07-28-2010, 2:53 PM
Randy Couture is 47 years old (born June 22, 1963 ) and laughs at your girly excuses...LOL!

Captain America!

;)

http://mmaaddicts.com/dann/ufc91/randy-couture-brock-lesnar.jpg
http://www.mmafightgirls.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/lasvegasandcaliforniajan31-feb10th2.jpg
http://media.canada.com/b2e3de01-96ee-45ae-96ce-b2054095eb64/randy-couture-gabriel-gonzaga-ufc74.jpg

BlindRacer
07-28-2010, 2:57 PM
Once again, he doesn't have physical disabilities that prevent him from this. If a person were just fat and lazy, but otherwise in general good health, then sure, but that's a whole other story opposed to the people that physically are incapable of this kind of thing.

fnslpmark112
07-28-2010, 3:00 PM
Those are some messed up ears.

BlindRacer
07-28-2010, 3:04 PM
Those are some messed up ears.

You do know that wrestling and many other martial arts, cause the ears to get 'messed up' like that, don't you?

If you didn't, then I'm really doubting that you are so well versed as you say you are.

inbox485
07-28-2010, 3:39 PM
Glock22fan, your attitude of victimization is what makes me question what is worth defending. You are not too old or too sick. You are too bitter and too set in your destructive ways.

Are you people f'ing kidding me? Have you ever even met the guy? What does it take to pound into your skulls that some people lack the physical capacity to physically fight? Don't get me wrong, I think that anybody that fails to see the value in knowing how to fight without a gun is a fool, but if you can't move that way, you can't move that way. Hate to break it to the few moron trolls here, but a physically disabled person who learns to shoot because it is all they have left as physical options does not have a victimization attitude.

Steyr_223
07-28-2010, 4:16 PM
Helio Gracie age 91..

bQmz1YDVt3c

Morihei Ueshiba in his 70's or 80's
yxxb2ctulEs


http://www.thestar.com/living/article/719503--the-wheelchair-as-a-weapon

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/82/82/2fc735804c56afed645598db94a0.jpeg

wm-rIZ5xkbc
8RME9y10-pU

Wherryj
07-28-2010, 4:21 PM
Karate? Blah. Krav Maga or sambo maybe, martial arts where people actually get hurt on purpose instead of combatsturbation.

I did a combination of Shorinji (Okinawan Shaolin) and Karate. The sparring was full contact. No one gets hurt "on purpose", but not all karate is "combatsturbation".

Knowing unarmed self-defense is never totally useless. As others said, know your options and know your limitations. It is never a waste to know more...

frankm
07-28-2010, 5:01 PM
You do know that wrestling and many other martial arts, cause the ears to get 'messed up' like that, don't you?
If you didn't, then I'm really doubting that you are so well versed as you say you are.

And you're supposed to go to the doctor and get them drained before they stay that way.

advocatusdiaboli
07-28-2010, 5:49 PM
...or when draconian gun laws have made it impossible to practically carry one.

Those same laws are prohibiting the carrying of the best edged weapons as well. But even then, it takes great skill and even luck to defeat a bigger and stronger opponent with an edged weapon. With a .357 SIG? He, not so much. That's why they are called the great equalizers.

E Pluribus Unum
07-28-2010, 11:41 PM
Those same laws are prohibiting the carrying of the best edged weapons as well. But even then, it takes great skill and even luck to defeat a bigger and stronger opponent with an edged weapon. With a .357 SIG? He, not so much. That's why they are called the great equalizers.

How so??

Fixed blade edged weapons are perfectly legal open carried and there is no gay "school zone" prohibition.

advocatusdiaboli
07-29-2010, 5:06 AM
Fixed blade edged weapons are perfectly legal open carried and there is no gay "school zone" prohibition.

IF you 160 and 5'7" you won't do well with a knife against 210 and 6'2" with a knife unless you are very well trained, practiced, and lucky that they aren't.

So you'd need sword to get a bit more even.

Try wearing a katana to work, through downtown SF or LA and to school and let me know how that works out for you.

But this is pointless because you'd still face firearms right now and your sword would just warn them so they shoot you first without warning.

It really is a pointless discussion about a fantasy world we won't live in unless we have a Zombie Apocalypse.

fnslpmark112
07-29-2010, 5:55 AM
I know all about the ears. I have had cauliflower once. I had to have it drained 6 times. I lost a month of training while it healed. My ear looks fine now. You can barely tell. I now wear headgear the minute we start drilling with a partner.

There is a mentality among the 20 something kids that the jacked up ears are cool. It is like a badge of honor. Some of them try to get it. They will be sorry later if they ever want a real job.

Back to the mindset thing - I started with Rickson Gracie back in 1995. I have met Helio. The thing that really has stuck with me over all these years is how they looked at things. They were not victims. They never gave up or made excuses.

P.S. I never said I was anything special at martial arts. I am just an old guy that never quit.

pullnshoot25
07-29-2010, 6:47 AM
I am impressed.

I finish work between 5:30 and 6:00. Then I feed the dogs and the cats, clean out water bowls and that sort of thing. Then I cook a meal for my sick wife and myself. I try to make this something rather more than a nuked TV dinner, so after we eat and I wash up it's getting on for eight, and I am shattered. Sometimes I collapse with a book by the TV for an hour or two, then I clean the cat boxes, the dog's water bowls (again), get the dogfood ready for breakfast and go to bed. Sometimes, I am in bed by eight - frequently after taking painkillers so I'll get to sleep. Sometimes I stay up much later to spend time with my wife who (because of pain) is often not in bed until 3:00 or 4:00. I pay for this lack of sleep later. (The other day, without chemical aid, my body slept for sixteen hours straight off.) The dogs wake me between 5:00 and 6:00 for their breakfast.

At the weekend, it is driving fifteen miles to the nearest store for groceries, and most weekends it is either a Costco trip, or a petshop trip or some other errand. Usually I am back by three for some housework; vacuuming or cleaning. The other weekend day it is laundry and yard work - mowing the lawn etc (not easy with hip pain like mine but we're off the beaten track and there are no gardeners going around). And, of course, the cats, the dogs and the wife still need looking after.

About the only chance I get to do something for myself is the hour or so reading/watching t.v. in the evening and sneaking out to the back 40 for 30 minutes to pop a few caps. Oh, and I've managed two hunting trips in the last four years.

Over the last ten years I've gradually had to cut out sailing, ocean fishing, horseback riding, hiking, swimming and just about every other activity just to keep ahead of the essentials of life.

I'm actually not bitter about this - life is what it is and s*** happens.

You have it relatively good. Good luck to you and I hope it lasts.

What I get bitter about is people who haven't lived my life telling me how I should live my life by their rules, clearly with absolutely no understand how impossible that is.

I am not being a jerk when I say this but have you considered getting a sheep or two for the lawn? You live in a rural area it seems so that shouldn't be an issue. The White House did that during WW2 when the groundskeepers couldn't be kept around.

Glock22Fan
07-29-2010, 7:20 AM
I am not being a jerk when I say this but have you considered getting a sheep or two for the lawn? You live in a rural area it seems so that shouldn't be an issue. The White House did that during WW2 when the groundskeepers couldn't be kept around.


Been there, done that. At one time had eight horses (inc. two miniatures), five sheep (two miniatures on the lawn - really cute), three goats (kept breaking out of the lawn and eating everything else), six chickens, two dogs and a number of cats.

Only one of the sheep would eat grass, the others had been weaned onto hay and that's what they wanted.

Cut back the animals to two dogs and two cats as my wife got sick and I had to manage them all on my own. The last to go were our two best riding horses, which we hadn't ridden for six months.

There's not a lot of grass, but it kills my legs to cut it. Fortunately, I get some help from the rabbits. Last year I didn't need to cut it after April, this year they are being a bit slower but finally seem to be doing a little more to help. If only the dogs didn't chase them off when they go out for a potty break.

frankm
07-29-2010, 7:54 AM
Back to the mindset thing - I started with Rickson Gracie back in 1995. I have met Helio. The thing that really has stuck with me over all these years is how they looked at things. They were not victims. They never gave up or made excuses.

I've met Rickson, got my pix with him. He's a cool guy. Never met Helio. But I know some of the Machados, Fabio, Nelson, lot's of them. And they're all the same, a quiet confidence.

fnslpmark112
07-29-2010, 8:21 AM
I was lucky enough to get private lessons from Rickson for about 6 months back in 1993. This was before the first UFC. He would teach at the Laguna Niguel Racquet club. I was so new, I really could only absorb the "mental aspects". He used to always say "Take the move your opponent gives you, not the one you want to take". Heck, that could be a philosophy for life right there.

Guys would come in an pay him $100-200 to fight with him. It was always the same. He would avoid the punch, get the clinch, take them down, then submit them. They always looked stunned because their karate, kung fu, ______ (fill in the blank) didn't work like they thought it would.

He said to me one time - You are a black belt in karate, right? I said yes. He said, what is it you train to do? I forget exactly what I said. But, it was something to the effect of knock my opponent out. He asked if I had ever knocked someone out. I said no. Then he explained that the goal of Jiu Jitsu was to submit a resisting opponent. You practice doing exactly that every time you train. Neither one was an exact simulation of reality. However, Jiu Jitsu comes much closer. Therefore, you could trust it more.

It made complete sense.

yellowfin
07-29-2010, 8:46 AM
^ Precisely why I call karate and various others combatsturbation: they make a lot of motion and you think it's doing something like the real thing but you're really just entertaining yourself temporarily to no real gain, but you convince yourself it's something.

fnslpmark112
07-29-2010, 8:52 AM
I tend to agree about karate. It wasn't completely worthless. But, if I could do it over, I would have just learned to box instead. I trust my Jiu Jitsu much, much more. In a related issue, I asked Rickson about fighting multiple opponents (karate claims to do this better). He said, "Multiple opponents. My friend, you need a weapon". He went on to say that, unless the multiple opponents were very inferior fighters, they would take you down and you would lose. If you can't stop one person from getting a clinch, it is hard to stop two or three.

frankm
07-29-2010, 9:42 AM
Karate, any standup art has the tools with which you can fight multiple opponents. It can be done, but difficult. The advantage of BJJ is that you can go full-speed, like real fighting. In karate you can't, cause you'd knock out teeth, collapse windpipes, etc. In our MMA training, the best fighters were the ones who knew both BJJ and striking arts. Once I fought a purple belt, when I was blue in MMA, he didn't know much about striking arts. I fought him to a standstill. In BJJ only matches, he cleaned my clock every time. Standup arts are valuable.

inbox485
07-29-2010, 10:47 AM
Gracie might be able to out wrestle his students, and he has plenty to teach, but any one of those students could easily kill him in a fist fight. Fact is, his protection is those students that are still able bodied. Any one of them would kill or die for him.

Maybe your not seeing it in the aikido video, but that guy isn't really throwing anybody. That is why there are soft and hard versions of aikido. When he was young, his students would try with all they had to put a fist upside his head and he would chuck them across the room like a rag doll. When he got old it changed to the student touches his arm, he farts a rainbow and the student does a front roll. What I said about Gracie applies here as well.

If you cant tell the difference between a black belt and somebody capable of defending themselves, I can't help you. I lost count of how many fully able bodied TakeMyDoe black belts I've personally tossed around and frankly toyed with while sparing full contact and you can count the number of black belts I have on that woman's left hand. I'm willing to bet if Glock22Fan went to a TKD studio and payed up each month, he'd get his black belt for just watching long enough, but it wouldn't be worth the paper the certificate was printed on.

Helio Gracie age 91..

http://www.thestar.com/living/article/719503--the-wheelchair-as-a-weapon

inbox485
07-29-2010, 10:55 AM
Karate, any standup art has the tools with which you can fight multiple opponents. It can be done, but difficult. The advantage of BJJ is that you can go full-speed, like real fighting. In karate you can't, cause you'd knock out teeth, collapse windpipes, etc. In our MMA training, the best fighters were the ones who knew both BJJ and striking arts. Once I fought a purple belt, when I was blue in MMA, he didn't know much about striking arts. I fought him to a standstill. In BJJ only matches, he cleaned my clock every time. Standup arts are valuable.

Interestingly, every major warrior class style in the world both ancient and modern included a combination of striking and grappling both standing and on the ground. Things like TDK and Karate were peasant arts and GRW and BJJ were competition arts - hence the lack of completion.

E Pluribus Unum
07-29-2010, 11:11 AM
IF you 160 and 5'7" you won't do well with a knife against 210 and 6'2" with a knife unless you are very well trained, practiced, and lucky that they aren't.

So you'd need sword to get a bit more even.

Try wearing a katana to work, through downtown SF or LA and to school and let me know how that works out for you.

But this is pointless because you'd still face firearms right now and your sword would just warn them so they shoot you first without warning.

It really is a pointless discussion about a fantasy world we won't live in unless we have a Zombie Apocalypse.

You really should take a defensive knife course. A knife fight can be won against a bigger, stronger person. Who cares how long their reach is? All you have to do is slash their arm as they come in. One or two good slashes on the arm and they wont want to play anymore.


I am completely vexed by this thread. Wasn't anyone in the Boy Scouts? BE PREPARED.

I agree, learning gun proficiency AND knife fighting, AND martial arts is a bit like carrying two spare tires. It's a lot of extra crap to look out for, but if you ever pop two tires in the middle of BFE, that second spare tire is gold.

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you are attacked and for whatever reason you don't have a gun, you better know how to defend yourself.

P.S.

You don't have to carry a Katana. Any blade over 4" is sufficient.

San FranPsycho
07-29-2010, 1:13 PM
Gracie might be able to out wrestle his students, and he has plenty to teach, but any one of those students could easily kill him in a fist fight. Fact is, his protection is those students that are still able bodied. Any one of them would kill or die for him.

Maybe your not seeing it in the aikido video, but that guy isn't really throwing anybody. That is why there are soft and hard versions of aikido. When he was young, his students would try with all they had to put a fist upside his head and he would chuck them across the room like a rag doll. When he got old it changed to the student touches his arm, he farts a rainbow and the student does a front roll. What I said about Gracie applies here as well.

If you cant tell the difference between a black belt and somebody capable of defending themselves, I can't help you. I lost count of how many fully able bodied TakeMyDoe black belts I've personally tossed around and frankly toyed with while sparing full contact and you can count the number of black belts I have on that woman's left hand. I'm willing to bet if Glock22Fan went to a TKD studio and payed up each month, he'd get his black belt for just watching long enough, but it wouldn't be worth the paper the certificate was printed on.

another good point, I know trainers who just give out belts for nothing...maybe not quite, but when somebody says they're a "Black belt" that doesn't really hold as much weight with me anymore as it did when I was say, 10 years old. Depends who you got that belt from

frankm
07-29-2010, 1:23 PM
Mostly true about McDojo's. I've known some TKD guys who were excellent streetfighters. I know two who defeated multiple opponents. Some of the TKD schools are very traditional in their training, incorporating Hapkido, weapons, etc. Now if you're talking the kicky-kicky Olympic training TKD schools. I agree. Some of the schools are good, but most are only sport. I sparred with a 3rd degree TKD guy who did Olympic training. He didn't know how to punch and only knew 3 forms. He could kick like hell though. But once you closed, he was toast. So, I guess it depends on the school and the instructor.

inbox485
07-29-2010, 2:00 PM
Mostly true about McDojo's. I've known some TKD guys who were excellent streetfighters. I know two who defeated multiple opponents. Some of the TKD schools are very traditional in their training, incorporating Hapkido, weapons, etc. Now if you're talking the kicky-kicky Olympic training TKD schools. I agree. Some of the schools are good, but most are only sport. I sparred with a 3rd degree TKD guy who did Olympic training. He didn't know how to punch and only knew 3 forms. He could kick like hell though. But once you closed, he was toast. So, I guess it depends on the school and the instructor.

Funny you mention Hapkido. Unlike TKD which is a peasant style, HKD is a spin off of Diato Ryu JuJitsu which is a warrior class style. I've met exactly one TKD instructor I respected as a SD instructor. I couldn't have cared less about his TKD master certificate, but his black belt in HKD was something to reckon with.

frankm
07-29-2010, 2:22 PM
Funny you mention Hapkido. Unlike TKD which is a peasant style, HKD is a spin off of Diato Ryu JuJitsu which is a warrior class style. I've met exactly one TKD instructor I respected as a SD instructor. I couldn't have cared less about his TKD master certificate, but his black belt in HKD was something to reckon with.

Actually, TKD is from Shotokan (Okinawa Ryu renamed) with a hodgepodge of indigenous Korean techniques and Chinese Longfist. The old style was very traditional. The primary weapon of pre-TKD arts was the fist. Sparring let you punch, knifehand, and ridgehand people. Some of the pre-TKD arts only had three kicks, front, side, round. Saying TKD used to be like saying "karate", there were variations. For instance, Chung Do Kwan and Jido Kwan were primarily military martial arts. So, it wasn't just the Hapkido that was good. Alas, in our modern times, these styles have been all but replaced by the Olympic style.

fnslpmark112
07-29-2010, 2:25 PM
Even Brazilian Jiu Jitsu has seen belt inflation. I think it happens to many arts over time. The instructors are tempted to give belts for "time served" as a way to encourage continued participation. Continued participation helps them stay in business.

This is not a good thing.

I really don't pay attention to the belt. I try to focus on just getting better and improving my game. The less I compare myself to others, the better off I am.

The nice thing about Jiu Jitsu is that everyone knows their place because it is all on the mat. As a result, most people are very humble and their is extremely little posturing. There is always someone better than you.

frankm
07-29-2010, 3:03 PM
Very true, sorry to say, it seems the biggest violater is Torrance. Where I trained, when I got my blue (made it to about blue with 4 stripes, right before purple), I was just handed the belt, everyone clapped, and we started rolling again. I only got it cause I was making some of the blue belts tap and none of the white belts could make me tap. I estimated that by that time, besides training, I had at least 500 matches on the mat until someone tapped. That's a lot of experience. I figured purple would be 1,000-2,000 matches. This is why BJJ is effective.

I remember when I trained with Nelson Monteiro. He once said, we don't consider that you know a technique until you can do it on people when they try to stop you and fail.

kellito
07-29-2010, 3:31 PM
While I have no physical limitations to this training, I find it very difficult to find the time. As it is now, I sleep about 5 hours a day, subtract another 1.5 hours of drive to get to a class other than TKD, and two hours for training. Sweet, 1.5 hours of sleep per day. Someday maybe I will have the time, but for now it's guns if I got 'em, and I ALWAYS have a knife on me.

inbox485
07-29-2010, 3:57 PM
While I have no physical limitations to this training, I find it very difficult to find the time. As it is now, I sleep about 5 hours a day, subtract another 1.5 hours of drive to get to a class other than TKD, and two hours for training. Sweet, 1.5 hours of sleep per day. Someday maybe I will have the time, but for now it's guns if I got 'em, and I ALWAYS have a knife on me.

Time management is the modern man's weakness.

frankm
07-29-2010, 3:58 PM
While I have no physical limitations to this training, I find it very difficult to find the time. As it is now, I sleep about 5 hours a day, subtract another 1.5 hours of drive to get to a class other than TKD, and two hours for training. Sweet, 1.5 hours of sleep per day. Someday maybe I will have the time, but for now it's guns if I got 'em, and I ALWAYS have a knife on me.

Wise policy. I always have a blade. As for the TKD school, if you scope it out real well, it might be decent enough.

kellito
07-29-2010, 5:26 PM
I figure that my past as a wrestler should serve me better than that place, looks more like an afternoon daycare to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

inbox485
07-29-2010, 7:19 PM
Wise policy. I always have a blade. As for the TKD school, if you scope it out real well, it might be decent enough.

Knife have use, and I do carry one because of it, but you'd be shocked at how close to worthless they are for SD if you really think about it. About the only time you can use a knife is in middle of a fight already going on. Knives are better suited for bad guys quite frankly. Now by all means carry a knife, learn some no nonsense go for the kill and get gone style of using, and add it to your SD toolbox, but be leary of convincing yourself it is a good solution.

Anothercoilgun
07-29-2010, 7:46 PM
Best response: Had the brave men at "The Battle Of [you name it]" used Karate, not one of us would be here. If we were we would not be free for sure.

E Pluribus Unum
07-29-2010, 7:50 PM
The problem the nay sayers keep smacking into is that this notion that one is mutually exclusive of the other. One can do BOTH. Yes.... gun proficiency is better than knife proficiency, which is better than hand to hand. I say, be good at all.

SgtDinosaur
07-30-2010, 9:36 AM
I have never practiced martial arts, although I think it is a worthy sport. In my opinion it is practical to have a good idea of how to do maximum damage to the human body using whatever weapons are available, including hands, feet , teeth, elbows, etc. Of course a gun is a very good start. I daresay I could frick someone up with a stick if I had to, though. All I really need to do is stop the attack and buy time to get away. There are lots of vulnerable body parts to attack as long as you don't mind getting down and dirty.

Wherryj
07-30-2010, 10:48 AM
I think the best response to such a stupid arguement is that "Ninjas aren't faster than bullets".

Not to mention if karate is all that is needed to defend one's self against any manner or impliment of attack then the COPs shouldn't need them either.

Woulda been the best retort to Saldana's reason for having armed security with her. I would responded with "If guns aren't needed for defense of self and others then why not just hire some blackbelts to protect you today Ms. Saldana?"

Have these people noticed that the Samauri and ninja have all but disappeared in Japan? I think that it had something to do with the introduction of firearms...

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 11:42 AM
Have these people noticed that the Samauri and ninja have all but disappeared in Japan? I think that it had something to do with the introduction of firearms...

The US had more to do with that; due to western influence, the feudal system was abandoned. Without the feudal system in Japan, there was no use for the samurai. The only thing firearms did was allow people who were unskilled peasants to learn proficiency at a distance. The samurai epically FAILed by taking a knife to a gun fight. No one is suggesting anyone use a knife, or karate, against a gun. When someone brings a gun, use a gun. When someone brings a knife, use a knife. When someone brings fists, use fists.

You ought to take a use of force class. If you are carrying a firearm with a CCW and someone starts a fistfight with you, you cannot present your firearm in a threatening manner to discourage him from doing so; that is brandishing. You cannot present your firearm and shoot him, unless the guy is huge and you can argue a disparity of force. The law is pretty clear that shooting someone for punching you is excessive force unless a disparity of force exists, or that punch caused serious injury.

So then what is the alternative?? You must fist fight him until such a time that his further action has caused, or will cause serious bodily injury to you; assuming, of course, retreat is not an option.

Glock22Fan
07-30-2010, 12:20 PM
You cannot present your firearm and shoot him, unless the guy is huge and you can argue a disparity of force. The law is pretty clear that shooting someone for punching you is excessive force unless a disparity of force exists, or that punch caused serious injury.

So then what is the alternative?? You must fist fight him until such a time that his further action has caused, or will cause serious bodily injury to you; assuming, of course, retreat is not an option.


Not just a question of whether the guy is huge. Age differences and infirmity also enter the equation. It's a bit dangerous really, because one blow could kill you whether there's a disparity or not. Or, someone with glasses/contact lenses, could be rendered unable to see by a single blow, making it hard to retaliate.

To start with, I try to avoid conflict. I have not been in a fight for fifty years, so if one starts, it's not my doing. If I was attacked by a little old lady swinging her purse at me because I'd picked up a bunch of bananas that she wanted to buy, of course I could not shoot her. But, someone fifteen plus years younger than me, apparently fit, red in the face, screaming and swinging his fists because he thought I had taken his parking spot, I would see as a serious threat. And, to forestall reopening that discussion, I don't believe that the law, as yet, requires me to either have learned Chilean Chang Cho (or other such techniiques), or to forgo my right to self-defence.

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 12:47 PM
Not just a question of whether the guy is huge. Age differences and infirmity also enter the equation. It's a bit dangerous really, because one blow could kill you whether there's a disparity or not. Or, someone with glasses/contact lenses, could be rendered unable to see by a single blow, making it hard to retaliate.

To start with, I try to avoid conflict. I have not been in a fight for fifty years, so if one starts, it's not my doing. If I was attacked by a little old lady swinging her purse at me because I'd picked up a bunch of bananas that she wanted to buy, of course I could not shoot her. But, someone fifteen plus years younger than me, apparently fit, red in the face, screaming and swinging his fists because he thought I had taken his parking spot, I would see as a serious threat. And, to forestall reopening that discussion, I don't believe that the law, as yet, requires me to either have learned Chilean Chang Cho (or other such techniiques), or to forgo my right to self-defence.

I understand your logic and I agree. I have studied martial arts long enough to know that in many cases, by the time you realize the other guy is better than you, it's too late. I have fought muscle-bound guys that were so slow and easily winded, I have easily won. There are other times when a small scrappy dude worked me over. Not to mention the lucky shot that renders you unconscience. In my view, if someone else is the aggressor, it is not up to the gun owner to let another person get within striking distance. If he does, then the gun is much less of an advantage and could end up being taken away. California law does not agree with us. I have taken 2 CCW courses and 2 combat arms style handgun courses and all were very clear that use of force is only warranted when a reasonable person (a jury) would deduce a disparity of force existed. A jury is not going to believe it did if you are an able-bodied seemingly fit male, I don't care how old you are. Old men, women, people in wheelchairs, all have an easy get out of jail free card. You and I do not. This means it will be a case-by-case analysis done by a jury. Even going that far, you will lose weeks of freedom, and scores of paychecks to a legal defense. In places like Kern County, it may not be an issue because we have conservatives on juries. In areas like LA county, its risky at best.

Decoligny
07-30-2010, 12:50 PM
The US had more to do with that; due to western influence, the feudal system was abandoned. Without the feudal system in Japan, there was no use for the samurai. The only thing firearms did was allow people who were unskilled peasants to learn proficiency at a distance. The samurai epically FAILed by taking a knife to a gun fight. No one is suggesting anyone use a knife, or karate, against a gun. When someone brings a gun, use a gun. When someone brings a knife, use a knife. When someone brings fists, use fists.
You ought to take a use of force class. If you are carrying a firearm with a CCW and someone starts a fistfight with you, you cannot present your firearm in a threatening manner to discourage him from doing so; that is brandishing. You cannot present your firearm and shoot him, unless the guy is huge and you can argue a disparity of force. The law is pretty clear that shooting someone for punching you is excessive force unless a disparity of force exists, or that punch caused serious injury.

So then what is the alternative?? You must fist fight him until such a time that his further action has caused, or will cause serious bodily injury to you; assuming, of course, retreat is not an option.

If someone uses their fist, I will be in fear for my life or in fear of great bodily injury. This is due to MY physical limitations. This is the definition of disparity of force. I stand a much higher chance of permanent physical injury/death than most people do.

The law says that if I am in fear for my life, I can use deadly force, i.e. a gun, in order to stop the threat.

Pretty much anyone in decent shape could with reasonably little effort kill or paralyze me with a blow to the head. If someone attacks me, I will use whatever means are necessary/available to protect my life and prevent great bodily injury.

If brought to trial, then the expert testimony of my doctors as to the extent of my disabilities is an essential part of my defense. I am not vulnerable just because I say I am vulnerable, I am vulnerable because the medical evidence proves that I am.

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 12:57 PM
The law says that if I am in fear for my life, I can use deadly force, i.e. a gun, in order to stop the threat.


That is not EXACTLY what it says. It says a "reasonable person". There are paranoid schizos that actually fear for their lives all of the time. People on drugs hallucinate and fear for their lives too, that does not give them carte blanche to shoot people. A jury will pick apart every thing that happened in slow motion with the benefit of hind sight and judge you accordingly.

If someone uses their fist, I will be in fear for my life or in fear of great bodily injury. This is due to MY physical limitations. This is the definition of disparity of force. I stand a much higher chance of permanent physical injury/death than most people do.


Pretty much anyone in decent shape could with reasonably little effort kill or paralyze me with a blow to the head. If someone attacks me, I will use whatever means are necessary/available to protect my life and prevent great bodily injury.

Then you MUST have a serious medical condition like blood clots, heart problems, or something serious. For healthy people, one punch is not likely to cause great bodily injury as it pertains to the use of deadly force. If you do have a serious condition, then you too have a get out of jail free card.

dfletcher
07-30-2010, 1:06 PM
I think the great advantage of all martial arts over a gun is that martial arts actually makes the bad guy with a gun go in slow motion or get very polite and wait for the martial arts guy to dispose of his current attacker before trying to fire a shot. :)

Just kidding - I think anything a person can do to improve their ability to defend themself is worthwhile, so long as they know when it should be applied and likely to succeed. I suppose the best defensive instrument is still our brain.

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 1:13 PM
I think the great advantage of all martial arts over a gun is that martial arts actually makes the bad guy with a gun go in slow motion or get very polite and wait for the martial arts guy to dispose of his current attacker before trying to fire a shot. :)

Just kidding - I think anything a person can do to improve their ability to defend themself is worthwhile, so long as they know when it should be applied and likely to succeed. I suppose the best defensive instrument is still our brain.

I have found in time that above all else, martial arts, knife arts, gun skills, and everything else... is.. mental arts.

Most conflicts can be avoided by situational awareness and or orally. Those who keep their wits about them usually prevail.

faterikcartman
07-30-2010, 4:51 PM
I have found in time that above all else, martial arts, knife arts, gun skills, and everything else... is.. mental arts.

Most conflicts can be avoided by situational awareness and or orally. Those who keep their wits about them usually prevail.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y4ssYOMNGAc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y4ssYOMNGAc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

GuyW
07-30-2010, 4:52 PM
For healthy people, one punch is not likely to cause great bodily injury as it pertains to the use of deadly force.

I can remember 2 local cases where a man was hit with fists (once? twice? thrice?) and died due to the blow to their head from hitting it in the fall....not to mention the 2 people I "know" who were kicked and stomped ****less after they were down.

If CA law does NOT recognize these basic facts of life and death, then once again, the law is an ***....
.

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 5:09 PM
I can remember 2 local cases where a man was hit with fists (once? twice? thrice?) and died due to the blow to their head from the hitting it in the fall....not to mention the 2 people I "know" who were kicked and stomped ****less after they were down.

If CA law does NOT recognize these basic facts of life and death, then once again, the law is an ***....
.

You are preaching to the choir my friend. I don't like it, but it does not change the facts.

They showed documented proof of CCW holders that were tried and convicted of either brandishing, and assault (for pointing). If they had actually SHOT those people, they would have been on the hook for a LOT more.

Imagine that... some guy comes and hits you in the head, you pull your gun to scare him, which it does... and then YOU get charged with brandishing. It sucks.

GuyW
07-30-2010, 5:45 PM
Imagine that... some guy comes and hits you in the head, you pull your gun to scare him, which it does... and then YOU get charged with brandishing. It sucks.

Simple answer: you pull the gun - you shoot....
.

E Pluribus Unum
07-30-2010, 5:56 PM
Simple answer: you pull the gun - you shoot....
.

Whatever man... do some research... there have been police officers charged with ADW, brandishing, assault, you name it. Bottom line is if you use your gun to defend yourself, you better be prepared for a legal fight. Some others may want another option in addition to a firearm.

kcbrown
07-30-2010, 6:01 PM
Imagine that... some guy comes and hits you in the head, you pull your gun to scare him, which it does... and then YOU get charged with brandishing. It sucks.

That's because you don't have the right to self-defense.

Oh, they'll jump up and down and claim you have that right, but when the chips are down, you don't.

I am highly skeptical that this will change, regardless of the RKBA changes that occur, because those in power don't want you to be able to actually defend yourself, and if they can't accomplish that by taking away your RKBA, they'll do it by directly taking away your right to defend yourself.

After all, it's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution, so it must not be a right .... right?

RGERBER
07-30-2010, 6:38 PM
I would like to add to this thread,

I have studied self defence for about 20 yrs. multiple styles enjoyed ED Parkers Kenpo the best, got hurt in a Brazilin jujitsu class after about 1 yr. and never recovered after multiple attempts. 4-knee surgeries and 10 yrs. later I hung up my black belts.

I was in combat pistol competitions in my late teens and early 20’s so I took up shooting again, got my CCW and have had some professional training in guns but not a lot.

Here is my point.

The number one rule in anything you do – push a car, saw a piece of wood, anything is
BASE OR BALANCE it is really the same thing, you need it in shooting and fighting.

My stances and step maneuvers. step drag, drag step, crossover cover out all of them are used in my shooting classes as well also and eye coordination did not hurt either and neither did many many other skills I had learned. When all of those came together with my shooting classes. WOW

Guy’s it is all one of the same, the gun is an extension of your body. To move and shoot and maintain BALANCE AND BASE IS WHERE IT ALL BEGINS AND ENDS. any grappling as you draw, stepping back, moving its all required.

It is a completion of the circle.

IMHO
Signed
Much more to learn.

Decoligny
07-30-2010, 8:37 PM
That is not EXACTLY what it says. It says a "reasonable person". There are paranoid schizos that actually fear for their lives all of the time. People on drugs hallucinate and fear for their lives too, that does not give them carte blanche to shoot people. A jury will pick apart every thing that happened in slow motion with the benefit of hind sight and judge you accordingly.





Then you MUST have a serious medical condition like blood clots, heart problems, or something serious. For healthy people, one punch is not likely to cause great bodily injury as it pertains to the use of deadly force. If you do have a serious condition, then you too have a get out of jail free card.

One of the things I have is heriated cervical disks caused by degenerative disk disease. Degenerative disk disease is a normal process in most people where the vertabal disks deteriorate as they get older. In some people, like myself, the deterioration is pronounced/accellerated. Currently I am lucky and the protruding portions of the herniated disks are not pushing against my spinal cord, if one were to be violently jarred/twisted, it could completely rupture or shift causing spinal impingement.

If I were to be in a car accident, there is a very good chance that I could end up paralyzed or dead. And likewise, if I were to take a good punch to the head, there is also a good chance of the same outcome.

lotar4life
07-30-2010, 9:09 PM
As a person who trains DAILY in close quarter combat both empty hand and with various weapons, let me say that you can be the greatest martial artist in the world and still not know the first thing about fighting.

Let's not mix up the Bill of Rights with opinionated propaganda.

advocatusdiaboli
07-30-2010, 11:57 PM
Look at my view point. I am a father of two teenage daughters. My wife and I both work. We own two working dogs (Springer Spaniels). All need care and time and exercise and etc. My wife and I work out religiously at the Y. We hike, bike century rides--we are pretty fit for our ages. But we don't come anywhere near to "ninja strength" and simply never will with our other responsibilities. Firearms are what enable us to be equal. And our daughters too. Period.

So drop all this Bruce Lee fantasy crud. Colonel Colt had it right: it is the great equalizer. And we need to be able to have it at our disposal when we need it--anywhere, any time, any place.

Sunwolf
07-31-2010, 6:01 AM
One of the things I have is heriated cervical disks caused by degenerative disk disease. Degenerative disk disease is a normal process in most people where the vertabal disks deteriorate as they get older. In some people, like myself, the deterioration is pronounced/accellerated. Currently I am lucky and the protruding portions of the herniated disks are not pushing against my spinal cord, if one were to be violently jarred/twisted, it could completely rupture or shift causing spinal impingement.

If I were to be in a car accident, there is a very good chance that I could end up paralyzed or dead. And likewise, if I were to take a good punch to the head, there is also a good chance of the same outcome.

Come on!If you would just work out you could make a 50ft leap away from danger according to all the martial artists here!