I was wondering about this earlier in my day and i thought it may be a good question to put up here. From what we know of crime during the era of flintlock weapons, there were many instances of attacks, muggings, robbery (both on foot and the archetypal highwayman). these usually involved one of the vast variety of short firearms such as flintlock pistols, blunderbuss and horse pistols and later revolvers. Now i know for many schools of japanese martial arts they studied techniques poignant to their day such as iai, knife defences and so on. you would think with such a large unemployed military class going around during the eras of peace that their would be training as a precaution to attacks with these weapons. I am assuming these weapons were around in Japan at that time, and im assuming the criminally inclined members of society would want to use them. So do techniques against firearm assualt/robbery exist in japanese martial arts of the day. if not, why not? if they dont exist i would assume its because of either the lack of availability of firearms during this age (or perhaps poor quality), or due to criminals attacking only nonmilitary castes because they do not posses the weaponry to fight back. but if that is the case, surley you would prefer to rob a rich merchant or warrior than a farmer? i hope people dont spout the ' they didnt train in disarms because your buggered if someone has a gun against you anyway' because whilst that is indeed obvious, people dont just use guns to kill people from a few meters off, there are various scenarios that involve the gun wielder wanting goods and so on from you, and therefore would necessitate being close to you,as done today with firearms and knives. thought it was interesting question - discuss?