I guess until we can actually show each other what we mean, we re going to have to agree to disagree... is pain invovled in option (a) ?? not necessarily. And as for (b), like I said above, I don't agree that this is the only mechanism involved in a successful joint-lock... but I don't think it will be possible to get any more into this, prodcutively, in writing. <salute>
I agree that we are a bit limited in regards to the locks by writing. In regards to pain being involved in KOs, I would say invariably. The pain/trauma can be so fast/strong that it is barely registered as the person is KOed, but it is still there, and is certainly there afterwards. I guess better conceptualization for my view is that in self-defense, I make the opponent do what I want physically (and hopefully mentally and emotionally as well). I do this by exerting various pressures on their body that direct them towards an outcome I desire. Pain is the way the body lets you know something is bad--and since my interests differ from my opponent's, what I intend to do will be "bad" from their perspective; thus I am exerting pain on them; whether it is physical pain, a shutdown of their nervous system, or even the disconcerting feeling of being locked up and unable to move without breaking your own body. To relate this back to the main discussion, if you don't train to handle pain/adversity from another, you will be overwhelmed by that "bad" on the street; as it's hard to get lucky and always strike first without receiving any "bad" in kind. <<salute>>
Dan, I can see where you are coming from especially by this quote above, what you mention. I will say this, one of the people I learned from years ago was Bob Koga. His art was one that he borrowed, then he changed and got permission from his Teacher and Master to evolve and develop something that was being asked for in the LEO industry world wide. I was just on the phone with him a couple of sunday's ago talking about his Crest and his school of thought, that he and another have developed for the use in the LEO field. It is "Kogajutsu", I have the first book he ever wrote, (40 years ago) and I have the others that he and W. L. Pelky have written. The latest has Phd behind the latters name. Does that mean he is better then Bob??? I doubt it. His art has been made to adapt to the thinking of todays world. His first book about the baton which I learned from, won't even go over anymore for the damage that was done in those days. It is world wide and he travels an awful lot to many county's and places. He teachs an art that is not as brutal as you mention. Why because it has to be in place for the today person not yesteryear. I find what you are talking about to be very extreme, I was there also one time in my life, when it was needed, we felt. It caused LAPD some very large lawsuits and I figure they are still paying. Same way with the Marine Corps the training is quite different then what I went through. Everyone want's to talk about the death matchs and the need to kill or hurt or maim, we are in a war, and we are not allowed to do it at will. There must be a reason. Match's have a referee. Most of us will agree it is the laws of the land the gentleness of the heart that has endured not the Brutish of above. The difference between us is, I will rise to the occasion, but the occasion has to rise first. It is a split second thing, sort of like pulling a gun and killing rather then being killed, but to pull the gun to soon is not good either, you have to have the occasion or else it is not the way. You mention you work for a school district, and you have this mentality. I doubt that you are able to do what you profess. One of the reason's I like the Crest of Mitose, it can change in a wink of an eye, but you never, and I'll say it again, never use the ultimate force until other force or stategy has been used. Whether it is a mere parry of the hand of the attacker, so you can hit with vigor, not to do so makes you the aggresor and this society that we both live in does not condone it. Even one of our favorites would go along with this thought, MM and MM. Maybe even Motobu? No. Gary
The mentality is the same. I have seen numerous teachers lose teeth, get black eyes, broken noses and go out on medical leave with injured backs because they tried to break up a fight between two nearly grown high school kids. I don't wade in throwing punches when breaking up two kids (Or two on one these days just about as often), but when I grab someone and take them down and lock them up, they squeal in about one second flat and do not want to continue. Fortunately I have the advantage of them focussing on each other when I approach them and I leave them no time to turn their anger and violence towards me as I have seen other teachers do. We've all seen the type I'm talking about, the ones that start yelling and telling them to stop and trying to get between them putting their hands on the "kids" chests etc. or simply trying to restrain them with a bear hug etc. while the other student continues to bash away. I will say that it has gotten to the point now that if students see me walking toward them to break up a fight, they stop before I can get to them because they know what's coming and that the fight is over. (A reputation does help). Teachers will call me to break something up before they call the Assistant Principals or even campus security. As churlish as this might sound for me to blow my own horn, it's a fact. So, yes, the tools I use are different than I would in a street fight, but the mentality is the same: I will stop the other person from continuing the violence. Period. Here is the California Education Code on this subject: "49001. (a) For the purposes of this section "corporal punishment" means the willful infliction of, or willfully causing the infliction of, physical pain on a pupil. An amount of force that is reasonable and necessary for a person employed by or engaged in a public school to quell a disturbance threatening physical injury to persons or damage to property, for purposes of self-defense, or to obtain possession of weapons or other dangerous objects within the control of the pupil, is not and shall not be construed to be corporal punishment within the meaning and intent of this section. Physical pain or discomfort caused by athletic competition or other such recreational activity, voluntarily engaged in by the pupil, is not and shall not be construed to be corporal punishment within the meaning and intent of this section. 44807. Every teacher in the public schools shall hold pupils to a strict account for their conduct on the way to and from school, on the playgrounds, or during recess. A teacher, vice principal, principal, or any other certificated employee of a school district, shall not be subject to criminal prosecution or criminal penalties for the exercise, during the performance of his duties, of the same degree of physical control over a pupil that a parent would be legally privileged to exercise but which in no event shall exceed the amount of physical control reasonably necessary to maintain order, protect property, or protect the health and safety of pupils, or to maintain proper and appropriate conditions conducive to learning. The provisions of this section are in addition to and do not supersede the provisions of Section 49000."
I am glad to hear that you are doing it the way you mention. I too have seen many of my fellow officers give an extra second to long and be very badly hurt becaue they did not use the good intuition that is there for your survial. It really irritates me when people are injured because they are not trained well and they are then the victim of the aggressor. We just had a Sheriff die because of rural roads and working alone and being in the early morning hours and no back up. Very sad. They mention he had 9 years on but most of that was not in the street so he was still pretty much of a rookie. They will come up with the usual excuses but if and when they find the person I will bet it is someone in our society that you should shoot first and ask questions later. Sounds rough but it is my mentality as you mention. I have always felt the need to be totally commited to going home after the shift. You may loose the job, but not your life. I have actually been asked to train some in the art of good defense and shooting (school) but I won't do it. Not a good thing, they need to go to a good academy or training week with someone like Bob Koga. Who is a certified person. Insured and the whole 9 yards. He is actually going to be in Stockton for a week teaching the baton. I am not going to go backwards and be told to hit them in the muscle of the arm rather then breaking the wrist with a good whack...LOL As a civilian I have the right now and it is much better for me. Breaking fingers is a very easy way to stop them very quick. Reasonable force is something that is in the mind of the person being attacked and best to be administered quick. Sitting and hitting some one over the head or a continuous barriage of punchs is not politially correct. When a good twist lock applied right will do the job. Is pretty important to be able to do those now with some quick results. Training is the key and having someone apply the holds on me is one way I like to feel if they are going to be effective. To train someone and they are hurt or killed later because they did not learn it right is a major problem for the trainers of today. Shooting at the range, I can't believe how bad many of them are. Actually your attitude is correct for your position, I hope you stay alert and in shape. Regards, Gary
