Lethal breaks?

[Adam]

Is there any system of fighting apart from military training that includes lethal breaks, such as the typical rambo-style neck break? I don't see how you could safely practice the technique.

[pesilat]

Originally posted by Adam
Is there any system of fighting apart from military training that includes lethal breaks, such as the typical rambo-style neck break? I don't see how you could safely practice the technique.

Well ... the "Rambo-style neck break" is a movie version that won't generally "break" anything. At worst, it may tear some tissue (which is painful and injurious, but not lethal).

There are ways to do it that are potentially lethal, but I've never seen them done in a movie.

In the Kali and, especially, Silat and Kun Tao Silat that I train, there are quite a few "lethal breaks." Or, more technically, potentially lethal breaks.

You safely train them the same way you safely train any kind of break. You set it up properly, then simulate it without actually doing it (i.e.: you may simulate it by taking your hands off the head and doing the motions in the air).

How do we know they'll work then?

Well, there are a couple of answers to that.
1) in some cases, the instructor has actually done it (many of the instructors in these arts have used their MA in war and in lethal combat)

2) it makes sense anatomically

Mike

[Adam]

Thanks for setting me right on the Rambo-break, I thought it looked a bit easy.

But still, how can you practice such a break? I know there's a huge difference between hitting a punching bag or hitting a real person, the difference between twisting thin air and actually breaking somebodys neck or back must be even greater. It would be difficult to calculate the right amount of force to use without ever doing it I think, anatomical sense or not.
Still, it probably shouldn't even be taught as it isn't normal self defense.

[Cain]

Well first off lethal techniques can't be practised 'realastically' I am sure you can understand why ;)

Secondly I would prefer to stay off 'lethal' techniques

Even simple techniques like a kick or punch can be lethal if struck to the right point but I don't feel I should discuss this in a forum....

And no, it's not dim mak :D

|Cain|

[pesilat]

Originally posted by Adam
Thanks for setting me right on the Rambo-break, I thought it looked a bit easy.

But still, how can you practice such a break? I know there's a huge difference between hitting a punching bag or hitting a real person, the difference between twisting thin air and actually breaking somebodys neck or back must be even greater. It would be difficult to calculate the right amount of force to use without ever doing it I think, anatomical sense or not.
Still, it probably shouldn't even be taught as it isn't normal self defense.

"Shouldn't be taught" ... I don't know if I'd go that far. Sometimes self-defense does mean lethal force ... though that generally means you've poached the pooch in a lot of other regards or, at least, have just had an incredibly bad day.

The only time you need to worry about "the right amount of force" though, is when you're looking for control/restraint/submission. In a lethal technique, by its nature, your intent is not control/restraint/submission so you do it as hard and viciously as possible. Obviously, these are absolute last-ditch things.

Of course the difference between twisting thin air and actually breaking are different. But you can get it lined up and very slowly go to the point of a tap. They can feel whether it's about to do damage or not.

Do you know whether it's going to be lethal or not? There are no guarantees in reality ... period. You could put a gun to the guy's head and pull the trigger and still not be able to guarantee 100% that he'll die.

But if you get the right set up and apply it full force, it should end the fight; whether he dies or not, he shouldn't be in much shape to continue fighting.

Mike

[Adam]

Point taken about the force, but I still don't think people other than soldiers should be taught techniques DESIGNED to kill. In a last-ditch effort there are other more gentle and probably more expedient ways to neutralize an attacker than by breaking his neck such as eye gouges, light throat punches and knee kicks.

Knowledge is dangerous sometimes. This kind of knowledge could find it's way to people without self control or mental disorders. I heard a story about a green beret who returned from 'Nam in a less than sane condition and, when accosted in a bar, he turned around and broke the neck of the offender on reflex. If he hadn't learned the technique he'd probably just have beaten him senseless.

lethal or not? In any case, cracking someones back or twisting his neck might confine him to a wheelchair for the rest of his days when he could have gotten away with a lost eye and a broken knee and you could have had a much shorter prison sentence.

I wouldn't want to learn any deliberately killing techniques, I don't need them and might be tempted to use them. If I was really worried I'd get armed.

[pesilat]

Originally posted by Adam
Point taken about the force, but I still don't think people other than soldiers should be taught techniques DESIGNED to kill. In a last-ditch effort there are other more gentle and probably more expedient ways to neutralize an attacker than by breaking his neck such as eye gouges, light throat punches and knee kicks.

Knowledge is dangerous sometimes. This kind of knowledge could find it's way to people without self control or mental disorders. I heard a story about a green beret who returned from 'Nam in a less than sane condition and, when accosted in a bar, he turned around and broke the neck of the offender on reflex. If he hadn't learned the technique he'd probably just have beaten him senseless.

lethal or not? In any case, cracking someones back or twisting his neck might confine him to a wheelchair for the rest of his days when he could have gotten away with a lost eye and a broken knee and you could have had a much shorter prison sentence.

I wouldn't want to learn any deliberately killing techniques, I don't need them and might be tempted to use them. If I was really worried I'd get armed.

Absolutely. That's why, you'll note, I haven't discussed any of the specifics of these techniques :)

I think that, even as a civilian, there are times when these types of techniques are applicable. Granted, these times are incredibly rare.

So, I see nothing wrong with them being taught in some systems. I think it's up to the instructor to determine whether someone should learn them, though. I feel the same about knife work which is inherently lethal and an integral part of most of the systems I train/teach. But I don't teach it out to anyone I don't feel that I can trust.

As far as learning it ... that's a personal decision. If, for instance, you were training with me and got to a point where I started bringing this material out, and you didn't want to learn it, I wouldn't hold it against you. You could simply leave class when I teach these things and come back the next class. I wouldn't test you on the knowledge and wouldn't think any less of you. It's a personal choice.

On the flip side of that: if someone were specifically interested in that type of material and they weren't, for instance, military, then I probably would never teach them those things (if I taught them at all) because I don't think I would be able to trust them.

Mike

[Adam]

Good point. It's nice to hear you're such a responsible instructor that you don't teach just anything to anyone who's asking. Such control I feel might also help reduce the increasing number of martial arts bullies I've seen running around unchecked. I'm not very familiar with your particular style, however, if all the instructors have some level of responsibility and don't emphasize overly on killing techniques, there should be no problems.

I still don't feel very comfortable about those techniques, but it's nice to know there are limits as to who can learn them.
Thank you for your explanation.

[pesilat]

Originally posted by Adam
Good point. It's nice to hear you're such a responsible instructor that you don't teach just anything to anyone who's asking. Such control I feel might also help reduce the increasing number of martial arts bullies I've seen running around unchecked. I'm not very familiar with your particular style, however, if all the instructors have some level of responsibility and don't emphasize overly on killing techniques, there should be no problems.

I still don't feel very comfortable about those techniques, but it's nice to know there are limits as to who can learn them.
Thank you for your explanation.

I can't vouch for all instructors in the arts I teach. But the ones that I'm personally familiar with (especially my instructors and peers) are all very careful about who they teach lethal material to (whether empty handed or with weapons).

To me, it's just part of trying to do things right.

I wouldn't hand a loaded gun to someone I didn't trust to have knowledge of gun safety. And this topic, in my mind, falls into the same category :)

Unfortunately, no one's perfect and it is possible to get mislead. Or to misread someone. And, on occasion, people do snap. There are no guarantees. All we can do is our best and hope that it's good enough in the long run.

Mike

[mild7]

hold on to a choke, the guy will die.

it does'nt get anymore lethal than that.

[Jazman]

Hapkido has several neck breaks, including other lethal moves. Being a humble yellow belt I have only seen these by my instructor so I speak not from experience. (scary sometimes)