Kung Fu Fighter Video

[Shaolinwind]

i
i remember seeing one segment where he tried to jab but stepped with his back leg and crossed it over his front leg behind himself. the other guy could have easily knocked him out here.

That's a steal stance as mentioned before.. Totally part of KF, totally in the wrong place IMHO.. I always percieved using steals as part of sword combat rather than empty handed.

 

[KenpoTex]

Also in reviewing the video the actions of the attacker in reaching around his back prior to the engagement would have resulted in me attacking immediately. The action is consistent with bring a weapon from concealment into battery.

I pointed this out on another forum where we were discussing the same vid. So far you're the only one I've seen that also keyed in on this. Like you said, If I saw someone move in this manner I'd be all over them. "Mr. kung-foo" was lucky this guy wasn't reaching for a weapon or he'd have been toast.

---------------

As far as assuming a position that's immediately recognized as a "fighting stance," I don't think it's the smartest thing to do, like some of ya'll have said, doing this would "tip your hand."

Of course, it looks like this was just another juvenile "pissing match." Either of them could have walked away and chose not too. When red-shirt hit his stance and the other guy backed off he should have called it a day. Both of them are idiots in my book.

 

[Bammx2]

I have seen an instance or 2 where someone broke down into a stance during a street altercation and it didn't go as planned.
One was a guy who squared off with a cop in ohio.....
The cop actually turned out to be a 3 time international TKD champion and 3 times Panama games grand champion....AND H2H combat instructor for the police dept!
He kind of enjoyed the challenge

Here in the UK......
there was shotokan instructor who got attacked by a 19yr old "career criminal" (he already had a long record for violent assaults) some years back and the young man had a knife.
The instructor was empty handed.......
SEVERAL stitches later,he killed the guy in self-defense.
The instructor got 15-life.
The judges lame a** excuse : "as instructor of the martial arts,you should have known better".
Of course....this comming from a pansy *** judge who has never even seen a fight,let alone be in one,,felt totally qualified and justified to speak on this subject, even when the dead guys PARENTS petitioned the court for the instructors release! THEY knew thier son was a scumbag and he had it commin!
So,over here...you'd be screwed for what the guy in red shirt did.
But it is getting better,slowly but surely.

 

[jkdhit]

i've seen the steal stance too but only with straight swords, never with kf.

 

[FearlessFreep]

For learning pursposes, can anyone explain the mechanics and proper usage of the 'steal stance'? Thanks

 

[DavidCC]

Sorry if this was posted before!

http://www.big-boys.com/articles/kungfufighter.html

why apologize, why say "if", when you yourself posted it at least twice

 

[arnisador]

Could be the guy is self taught from a book.

Hmmm, that's a possibility--he learned from a book, or DVD, or from watching a sibling who actually did study.

I agree that the cross-behind step is risky! What if he gets tackled just then?

 

[Shaolinwind]

He kind of enjoyed the challenge

Here in the UK......
there was shotokan instructor who got attacked by a 19yr old "career criminal" (he already had a long record for violent assaults) some years back and the young man had a knife.
The instructor was empty handed.......
SEVERAL stitches later,he killed the guy in self-defense.
The instructor got 15-life.
The judges lame a** excuse : "as instructor of the martial arts,you should have known better".

Is it me or does the UK punish people for defending themselves a lot? I hear stories like this all the time.

 

[Shaolinwind]

For the record I must also add that it looks like he had ample chance to walk away, and didn't take it. Which of course sucks.

I showed this video to some non-martial artists and they agree the final shot looks like dumb luck.. I stand by my opinion that it was a combination of some calculation and a lot of luck. Luck seems like it is often a factor in just about any battle.

 

[arnisador]

I too have heard that the U.K. is harsh on those acting in self-defense. I wonder if it's true?

 

[Bammx2]

as far as the courts are concerned,you are allowed to use whatever you want to defend yourself....but then you have explain WHY you HAD what you used in the first place.
If you get attacked by 5 guys with clubs and knives...yes,you can use a knife,but then you have to explain why you had a knife in the first place and 8,maybe 9 times out of ten....you got a minimun of 2 years for being posession.If it has a locking blade...up to 5 years.
When all is said and done.....
the law is made by a PILE O PANSIES who know NOTHING about thier life being on the line and they never will.
They blatantly ignore any input from hospital services,victim support services or even the beat officers who actually know the truth of things at hand.
At one time (and this dates back to a time when a man could be arrested for being gay...but the was NO WAY a woman could be gay,queen victoria refused to believe that was possible), the police was portrayed as a perfect crime fighting unit and ONLY they could fight crime.The law makers have a fiiiirm grip on the word "vigilante".
Now,in the 21st century.....
Everything insight is banned,NOT because of the lame reason they spew all opver the news.."we trying to keep these out of the hands of criminals"..
but because they are trying to get assaults on the police to go down.
This is the ONLY LEO comminuity on the planet that is unarmed.
Pepper spray and asp batons just ain't getting it.
and the criminal element KNOW the police can't do a damn thing about it.
If you get attacked on you own property,law states you must run inside your house,lock the door and call the police.
If they manage to get inside,you are supposed to lock yourself in a room and wait for the police.
Again,do nothing.
They do lie,sorry,"say" you can defend yourself in your home...but if you hit the assailant more than once..you are arrested for "no-reasonable" force.
If you chase someone for stealing your property...YOU get arrested.
The police are so perfect...they WILL find it.
The police here act as mindreaders.
If you have a spotless record and they pick you at random and find something on you THEY don't like...they KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt...you WILL commit a crime with it!
If you say you carry a kubaton for DEFENSE...you done.
If you say the magic word implying self preservation,then you freely admit that you ARE INTENDING to cause bodily harm and therefore...you ARE a criminal.
Fortunately,the street police are getting wise and taking more things into consideration.But that isn't happening fast enough.
I have recieved 2 pieces of advice off the record here from police....
1) do NOT hang around when you are done! Leave the area immediately!
2) dead men don't argue.

The last one may be extreme,but living here in south london,
you have middle eastern gangs,jamaican gangs(yardies) british "firms" ( look up the Kray twins and the charlie richardson gang) eastern block gangs from all countries,far east gangs(triads flourish here in london) and you have gypsies(pykies) and list goes on.
They fear nothing and nobody.

Why do you think I specialise in knife fighting?
They do.

 

[Shaolinwind]

as far as the courts are concerned,you are allowed to use whatever you want to defend yourself....but then you have explain WHY you HAD what you used in the first place.
If you get attacked by 5 guys with clubs and knives...yes,you can use a knife,but then you have to explain why you had a knife in the first place and 8,maybe 9 times out of ten....you got a minimun of 2 years for being posession.If it has a locking blade...up to 5 years.
When all is said and done.....
the law is made by a PILE O PANSIES who know NOTHING about thier life being on the line and they never will.
They blatantly ignore any input from hospital services,victim support services or even the beat officers who actually know the truth of things at hand.
At one time (and this dates back to a time when a man could be arrested for being gay...but the was NO WAY a woman could be gay,queen victoria refused to believe that was possible), the police was portrayed as a perfect crime fighting unit and ONLY they could fight crime.The law makers have a fiiiirm grip on the word "vigilante".
Now,in the 21st century.....
Everything insight is banned,NOT because of the lame reason they spew all opver the news.."we trying to keep these out of the hands of criminals"..
but because they are trying to get assaults on the police to go down.
This is the ONLY LEO comminuity on the planet that is unarmed.
Pepper spray and asp batons just ain't getting it.
and the criminal element KNOW the police can't do a damn thing about it.
If you get attacked on you own property,law states you must run inside your house,lock the door and call the police.
If they manage to get inside,you are supposed to lock yourself in a room and wait for the police.
Again,do nothing.
They do lie,sorry,"say" you can defend yourself in your home...but if you hit the assailant more than once..you are arrested for "no-reasonable" force.
If you chase someone for stealing your property...YOU get arrested.
The police are so perfect...they WILL find it.
The police here act as mindreaders.
If you have a spotless record and they pick you at random and find something on you THEY don't like...they KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt...you WILL commit a crime with it!
If you say you carry a kubaton for DEFENSE...you done.
If you say the magic word implying self preservation,then you freely admit that you ARE INTENDING to cause bodily harm and therefore...you ARE a criminal.
Fortunately,the street police are getting wise and taking more things into consideration.But that isn't happening fast enough.
I have recieved 2 pieces of advice off the record here from police....
1) do NOT hang around when you are done! Leave the area immediately!
2) dead men don't argue.

The last one may be extreme,but living here in south london,
you have middle eastern gangs,jamaican gangs(yardies) british "firms" ( look up the Kray twins and the charlie richardson gang) eastern block gangs from all countries,far east gangs(triads flourish here in london) and you have gypsies(pykies) and list goes on.
They fear nothing and nobody.

Why do you think I specialise in knife fighting?
They do.

All this, and I am still mad as hell about those tea tarriffs they inflicted on us.

 

[rupton]

For the record I must also add that it looks like he had ample chance to walk away, and didn't take it. Which of course sucks.

I showed this video to some non-martial artists and they agree the final shot looks like dumb luck.. I stand by my opinion that it was a combination of some calculation and a lot of luck. Luck seems like it is often a factor in just about any battle.

Agreed, but I look at luck in a fight differently. To me luck isn't if one of my techniques connects properly (that's skill, hopefully resulting from years of correct practice combined with good no mind and control), luck is if I have the opportunity to A.) never be in that situation in the first place or B.) have the chance to quickly get away. I hope no one uses this as a good example of self defense. I mean there was no self defense aspect to it. It looks to me like the Kung-Fu guy got a little pissed off, lost his temper and started to fight. There was a couple of times where he was up in the other guys face saying "Come on" and the attacker stopped to tie his shoe for goodness sake, not a lot of immediate urgency there ;-) Tell me this kid probably couldn't have, shouldn't have walked away. There's nothing budo like or honorable IMO of knocking some guy down who probably deserves it. Just my $.02

 

[jkdhit]

i think the guy deserved it for starting the whole confrontation but the guy in the red shirt needs to be taught a lesson too

 

[sgtmac_46]

If I wanted to watch two clowns fighting, I would go to the circus.

In all honesty, though, I think the guy who got knocked out deserved it. I do wish the tape would have continued running so I could see his homeboys reactions to the knockout. Other than that, it seemed like pure dumb luck. He tried the hit he "trained" and kept missing, so he just started swinging. This guy was lucky the guy he knocked out was a bigger clown than he was. It's just an example of someone with poor training and no clue fighting someone with NO training and no clue.

 

[BaiKaiGuy]

Is it me or does the UK punish people for defending themselves a lot? I hear stories like this all the time.

In all fairness, the US has several double standards, although not as bad as the UK.

For example, if homeboy would have popped red shirt good enough to break his nose, it would be misdemeanor assault in PA. If red shirt actually had a bb (just for hypo purposes), it's felony assault because he has a bb. Same goes for boxers and other MAers.

 

[dsp921]

In all fairness, the US has several double standards, although not as bad as the UK.

For example, if homeboy would have popped red shirt good enough to break his nose, it would be misdemeanor assault in PA. If red shirt actually had a bb (just for hypo purposes), it's felony assault because he has a bb. Same goes for boxers and other MAers.

Is this true? Sounds pretty unfair to me.

 

[BaiKaiGuy]

Yup. the Pennsylvania high courts have held that Black Belts, Career Boxers (amateur), certain military types and pretty much all professional fighters have a higher burden when arguing self-defense. They also have a higher burden on the "one punch rule" which I referred to in my above post. Trust me, I've argued this one several times in court to get my clients off the felony charges...

I can't remember the case off the tope of my head, I've never actually defended a black belt, thankfully.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Yup. the Pennsylvania high courts have held that Black Belts, Career Boxers (amateur), certain military types and pretty much all professional fighters have a higher burden when arguing self-defense. They also have a higher burden on the "one punch rule" which I referred to in my above post. Trust me, I've argued this one several times in court to get my clients off the felony charges...

I can't remember the case off the tope of my head, I've never actually defended a black belt, thankfully.

Thank god I live in Missouri, where a punch is still a punch, a kick is still a kick, no matter who it's from.

 

[dsp921]

I understand that if the case is a "one punch homicide" the MAist would have a harder time in court. But, if a "regular" person hits someone and breaks their nose it's a simple assault, if a BB hits that same person in the same situation with the same result (a broken nose), it's now a felony assault for no other reason than person two is a BB? Wow, that's wrong if you ask me. They might as well require BBs to register themselves as deadly weapons....
And I thought lawmakers in Mass. where over the line. I take it by your comments you are an attorney so I guess you would know the laws in your state, crazy as they are. But you haven't defended a BB as of yet, and still had to agrue against felony charges, I'm a little confused.