Maybe. I think in clear cut cases of self defence maybe not. Not every case is weird or complicated like the Florida woman. People have a right to defend themselves. And people do indeed do so without getting in legal trouble for it. I am not going to allow someone to rape, abduct, or kill me because of potential legal issues down the road. I am talking about defending myself in the attack. I am talking about where nothing else works. (I positioned myself in a safe environment, I tried to de-esclatate the situation, lesser force did not allow me to get away......etc.) Honestly, I don't get the mentality of not protecting oneself at all. Like I said before, this would be true before I studied MA. But to say, "here study MA, but DON"T use it to protect yourself" just strikes me as really odd. There is some balance to be struck between "scalding" someone for not using a deer blade to kill someone" and this other extreme of letting yourself get raped or killed when you have the ability to possibly stop it. Key phrase being stopping the attack. Hopefully, you stun them and run away. But sometimes that may not be enough.The intention I would have is to stop the attack. And I won't refuse to use potential tools in the arsenal. Doesn't mean that is the first thing I go to either. It depends on the situation.
Because I am a middle aged single woman, living all alone. I live a quiet pretty hermit like existance. Anyone breaking into my house has ill intent. I have the right to defend myself. I find it extremely odd to suggest otherwise. And I said that a knife against a drunk uncle is not appropriate. So that is a false argument.
No, that isn't what I am saying at all. I am saying I am not afraid to use the hammer if I must - if everything else I used failed.
You just haven't met a properly trained high-ranking slice-do practicioner. It's such a fast and deadly art that when you are struck a death blow you can hear all your vertebrae breaking second before dying a gruesome death.:hat: Pity on the fellow who has to clean up after you're finished off. :evil:
With as many arts as there is that fall under the "Kung Fu" umbrella terminology, surely some of them were created for the military (killing) and others created more for civilians in dangerous times/places (self defense). I have very little knowledge of CMA so maybe I am wrong in this but I don't see how they could all be lumped into one category or another.
Nope, that is the Klingon weapon I think you are thinking of. Actually saw an article in some Kung Fu magazine a few years ago about how some Star Trek and MA people were actually working with it as a MA weapon. Go figure.
Your instructor sounds like he should be teaching the Cobra Kai. Did you mean they should scorn weak people? That would fit right in with the Cobra Kai. So how many people has he killed with a deer antler? And isn't that cheating? Shouldn't a real master be able to just shatter skulls like a coconut without needing weapons? On the other hand deer antler won't be picked up by metal detectors, so maybe he has a point...
Basic anatomy, and research: We are not talking magic death touches here. Blunt force trauma to the back of the head can cause fatal injury to the autonomic nervous system. Blunt force trauma to voice box can cause the airway to swell shut. Abrupt rotation of the neck can cause shearing of blood vessels around the spinal column, leading to bleeding, localized anoxia, nerve damage, and death from pulmonary arrest or respiratory arrest. Abrupt tilting of the head can cause shearing of blood vessels and Coup-Contrecoup injuries to the brain. Many of the techniques that we practice, although from a traditional art, can be found in modern army training manuals. We spend a lot of time on basic mechanics/bag work developing striking power. The areas indicated above are particularly susceptible to damage. It would be irresponsible not to warn students of the potential outcomes of striking these areas with power. This is a question faced by all martial arts instructors. The answer is a compromise. The more realistic the training the more likely that the student can practice a technique effectively, however the more accidental injuries occur. We do not permit strikes to the back of the head or the throat in sparring because of the potential for injury. So we have to rely on free sparing to build up a student's speed, power, and accuracy. We have to practice potentially lethal techniques at slow speed with control to make sure the student understands correct technique. It is true that training is not, and can never be, the same as fighting.
All martial arts can be deadly some were more for it than others but they all have lethal moves. I have been taught numerous techniques that are or very well could end in death. I have injured someone in a fight and lucky for me I was not charged with anything. I didn't think it was that big of a deal I was scraped and a bit bruised but this guy I latter found had some fractured ribs and stuff. A year passed and a sheriff showed up on my door step saying the thing had been dropped. They had nothing to pursue any case against me or him. A guy died awhile back at a local bar he was knocked to the floor in a fight and died. He hit his head and that was the end. A martial artist should always think carefully before raising his fists to anyone. You just don't know how much someone can take.
That's way I always carry a portable kettle with me. So when I see old people try to pick up cartons of milk I can scald them for being weak I think the whole topic of self-defence is a particularly grey one, but personally I'm in the camp that you have to use whatever force reasonable to get away with as little harm as possible. You can't spend your time fretting about the possible consequences in the heat of the moment, after all. Wasn't that the one where she actually left the house itself, grabbed a gun, went back in and in doing so put herself in the way of potential harm? There was a McDojo operating about half an hour away from where I used to live that genuinely had the slogan "practising the non-combat form of martial arts" on their website. ....Yeah.
You are free to state your opinion, however I strongly disagree with you. When a technique has the potential to cause serious injury or death it is irresponsible not to inform students of the potential outcome of applying that technique No, and No, I am a martial arts instructor. To state that there is a right to self defense and that this right extends to the use of deadly force if necessary, is not legal advice, it is a statement of fact. I do not provide legal advice on how the law judges when lethal force is necessary because I do not have a qualification that entitles me to do so. I do give practical advice. If you cannot avoid a situation and if you genuinely believe that your life is under immediate threat then the legal niceties are irrelevant because someone is trying to kill you. The right to self defense as explained above. If you mean "do I teach the psychological aspects of being the subject of a violent attack?" - fight, flight or freeze reflex and the affects of adrenalin on the body etc. This is difficult to do because, other than generalities, the only thing you can say about the experience of real violence is that it is never the same twice. If you mean do I teach the psychological aspects of living with having harmed or possible killed another human being. No, i do not have a qualification in psychotherapy. See previous post Yes, as I explained in my previous post although I practice a traditional art many of the techniques appear in modern army training manuals because they are proven to work under pressure. No, and you argument is absurd, one does not need to hit someone over the head with a sledge hammer to know that it will kill them. The door to the training hall swings both ways. I do not tie students into lengthy up-front contracts. My students are free to leave at any point. If a student wants to leave I am happy to give them information and advice on other instructors in my area. My students stay because they feel that they are learning something practical and valuable.
It is easy to kill someone. The human body isn't as strong as we'd like to believe it is. The question is, would you?
I think there may be some confusion about what I was getting at, probably my fault. I'm not saying you shouldn't act, nor am I saying you shouldn't do everything you can to keep yourself safe. My point is if you are going to escalate to a high level then you absolutely must be able to justify it and articulate that justification because guess what? Scumbags lie all the time and they are going to be coming out with a similar story to protect their ****. This requires you to be able to understand what is going on and have an understanding of why and how you would act to a given scenario. Simply saying "I was afraid" or "it was self defence" doesn't cut it. If you are teaching self defence or are in anyway relating what you do to that context then you should be able to discuss legal repercussions, aspects of law and you should provide the tools with which to develop your students so that they can navigate the chaos of a violent situation. If you aren't providing them with the ability to work along the whole range of the force continum and with an understanding of the fall out from an altercation then you shouldn't be teaching self defence because you are failing your students and giving them a fraction of what they need.
In practice you quickly run into diminishing returns when it comes to thinking about the application of law. Legal professionals are very cagy about the advise they give because they appreciate how complicated the law can be. I have good friends who are legal professionals and the one thing I have learned from them is, if you are not a legal professional, don’t give advice on the law. In addition, worry about the legal consequences of acting has the potential to make a person freeze in the face of an attack. The approach I take is to stress the importance of avoiding fighting where possible and of using what you believe is reasonable force to ensure your safety if you have to fight. I stress to students that as adults they are accountable for their own actions and for the consequences of their actions. This approach does not work with kids, but I don’t teach kids.
