Ninjutsu good for security agent?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
when i have,a reflective time over the regrets in my life, they generaly split in to two main groups, the, women i should have,slept with whilst i was being faithful to people who weren't being faithful to me and people i really should have punched when i had the,chance, .

if i had been more of a violent lover boy , i would now have very few regrets at all
I have no regrets about people I didn’t punch.
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
14,041
Reaction score
4,488
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
I regret the people I punched, not the people I didn’t punch.
I always want to punch one of my elementary school teacher on his face. One day I heard that he had passed away, I regret that I didn't punch him when he was still alive.

Why do I hate that elementary teacher so much? When I was in my 3rd grade in Taiwan, one day I got into a fight with my classmate. The teacher hit that boy once, he then hit me 6 times. The teacher asked me whether if I understood why. I said that I didn't. He said, "Because you are a pig". Back then Taiwanese would call a Chinese who immigrated from China to Taiwan as "pig". All my kid life was the history of "pig fought back against human's racism behavior."

I don’t regret any violence I didn’t commit.
Old Chinese saying said, "It's OK to wait for 3 years to execute your revenge". I assume I have waited too long.
 
Last edited:

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,921
Reaction score
7,476
Location
Covington, WA
I always want to punch one of my elementary school teacher on his face. One day I heard that he had passed away, I regret that I didn't punch him when he was still alive.

Why do I hate that elementary teacher so much? When I was in my 3rd grade in Taiwan, one day I got into a fight with my classmate. The teacher hit that boy once, he then hit me 6 times. The teacher asked me whether if I understood why. I said that I didn't. He said, "Because you are a pig". Back then Taiwanese would call a Chinese who immigrated from China to Taiwan as "pig". All my kid life was the history of "pig fought back against human's racism behavior."


Old Chinese saying said, "It's OK to wait for 3 years to execute your revenge". I assume I have waited too long.
Live your life how you need to do it. I’ve punched plenty of people. There are a few guys around here I really think are not quality human beings. i don’t want to punch them, however confident I am their training won’t help avoid such punch. In fact, I think their delusion would make it more cruel.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
EDIT: it was not 15 years ago it was even 18 years ago, damn time flies faster than I would like it to go.
When someone asks how long I've been doing anything (consulting, speaking, martial arts, whatever), the answer has become almost universally too big to say, so my reply is, "About [mumble] years."
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
I don't think you will find a correlation other than the qualities that make a person succesful at sport make them successful at dealing with drunks.

You also get non sport big dudes. Because mass makes the job easier.

View attachment 21102
That latter supports my hypothesis (because the mass also makes the job somewhat less risky), though that may be nothing more than confirmation bias. In fact, the first statement is pretty close to my point. People tend to be drawn to what they are likely to succeed at.

I suspect that there are few people who get into that line of work (specifically bouncer) who aren't a little bit thrill-seeking and fairly risk-tolerant, and used to being physically competent. I think those are personality traits likely to be common among sport competitors, too. There will certainly be exceptions to that, but those seem likely matches. And I'd expect that - in the current MA environment - folks who match those qualities are more likely to be drawn to the more obvious sports (BJJ, MMA, maybe Judo) and less to TMA. I suspect this actually bleeds some of the likely better competitors/fighters from TMA, increasing the need for inter-style training.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
I don't think you will find a correlation other than the qualities that make a person succesful at sport make them successful at dealing with drunks.

You also get non sport big dudes. Because mass makes the job easier.

View attachment 21102
Oh, and that dog doesn't seem to mind the big guy. I'm guessing she wasn't being thrown out for bad behavior.
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Manchester UK
No, it isn't. To clarify, if SD doesn't work you don't find yourself in a fight. You find yourself defending yourself from an assault. That's why when you go to work you don't ask your friends if they watched that boxing assault on TV at the weekend. A fight is when you agree to take part in the violence, either in the ring, the street or the dojo. SD is when you did not agree and do not want to take part in the violence. Consensual violence is fighting. Protecting yourself form non consensual criminal violence is SD. They are not the same. When your experience of "SD" is getting into fights with men in the street you might think fighting is SD, but that doesn't make it so. Male MAs, particularity young male MAs, are particularity guilty of this assumption.

If I tell someone not to accept lifts from strangers that is SD, and it works. I don't need to have accepted a lift form a stranger and have it gone horribly wrong to justify my ability to impart that advice. The advice is sound, and it works, and it has absolutely nothing to do with men fighting in a bar/the street. But that is all you are able to see SD as and that is were your problem lies. If your 80yo Gran is worried about having her handbag stolen you don't her to join a boxing club. You teach her what muggers look for when selection their victims, so she can avoid being selected as a victim. That's called Target Hardening, and is well document, accepted and recognised SD skill, it also has not one single thing to do with men fighting each other in the street.


No, it doesn't The purpose of a fight is to win by deafening your opponent. The purpose of SD is to create the opportunity to escape. If in a fight if you knock your opponent to the ground you rush over and keep hitting them until the ref stops you. Then you win.

If you knock someone down in SD and have the opportunity to flee, but instead choose to stay and mount them so you can keep hitting them then you have broken the law, as you have gone beyond "reasonable" SD and have now committed assault yourself.

If I am in a SD situation if I run away and get home safely that counts a win. If I step into the ring and then spend the rest of the round running away from my opponent I will eventually get disqualified for failing to engage.

What counts as a "win" in fighting is not the same as what counts as a "win" in SD and vice versa.

The two have completely different objectives. But we keep coming back to the same problem. When you are only able to view SD in terms of fighting, you view "winning a fight" as the same objective as SD, but it isn't.


No it doesn't. Preemptive striking is a SD skill, it is not a fighting skill as you can't become World Champion with a record of 0 wins, 0 loses and 17 disqualifications for hitting your opponent before the bell sounds. Bobbing in and out of striking range, and throwing an exploratory jab to see how your opponent reacts and spot potential weakness in his response that you can exploit it is a valid fighting skill. But you don't bob in an out of range throwing exploratory jabs to test you rapists reaction. That's a fighting skill, not a SD skill.

If I submit my opponent with a triangle choke in the ring I win. If I triangle choke someone outside the chip shop on a Friday night his mates come out and stomp my head flat. What works in a fight/in the ring does not necessarily work for SD, what works for SD does not necessarily work in a fight/the ring.

There is a whole area of soft SD skills (i.e. no physical SD skills) that have absolutely nothing to do with agreeing to fight someone in a pub car park.

Learning the warning signs of a potentially abusive relationship, so you can get out of it early, is a SD skill. It has nothing to do with fighting. You don't teach women in a SD class to become MMA fighters so if there bf turns out to be abusive and controlling they can get him to tap out. You teach them to spot the warning signs so they can get out of the relationship.

Different problems, different skill sets.

Yes there are some overlaps, a good punch is always a good punch of course, but consensual fighting skills are no the answer to all of lifes SD problems, and good SD skills do not make you good at consensual sparring/fighting/sporting contests. Unless of course you are only able to view SD in terms of men fighting each other.

Fighting makes you good at fighting. SD makes you good at SD.

They do not have "exactly the same skill set" Not even close.


The problem is you have a very very narrow one dimensional view of SD. You are only able to think of SD in terms of getting into a fight with other men on the street or in a bar, so anytime anyone suggest SD can possibly be anything other than that you refuse to accept that because it does not match your own personal experience of violence. There are other people that need to protect themselves, (older/female/children) and they need to protect themselves from a variety of things; things other than bar fights. The fact then that someone may have some SD advice that does not directly relate to bar fights does not mean it is not SD, anymore than the only things that can relate directly to to bar/street fights can be classed as SD. And the fact someone may be more knowledgeable,and experienced, about these other aspects (shock horror, how can that be?) does not mean they have set themselves up as an expert.

Of course you will disagree, and continue to argue. But I have no interest in wasting more time or crayons explaining it, so enjoy the rest of your day.
there is just to miffle to go through line by line, so let's look at the major defintion you have just made up to suit your view.

A fight is a physical contest between two or more people, it doesn't require to be consensual to be a fight nether does it require to be in a ring or have a referee. Once you take that as a fact, then most of your points,disappear.

if someone it attacked and FIGHTS back that a,fight, ie

if someone decides to punch me and i react by punching them, its now a fight, if someone menaces me and i punch them before they can punch me, that's, a fight, if i run away , that not a fight, if i run away backwards whilst punching people who are chasing me that's a,fight.

the purposes of a fight out side of a,ring, isn't to win, there are no points and no judges to say who the winner is, its to hurt them more than they hurt you, so they a) give up b) are incapable of continuing c) won't try it again

it can be both a criminal assault and a fight, fighting back doesn't alter the law and make the attacker less guilty.

i think that just about covers your main points.

nb old timers can fight back as well, usually not very well
 
Last edited:

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Manchester UK
I have a theory, entirely unsubstantiated, that there's a mindset match between sport/competition and taking on jobs like bouncing. It's a risk-taking/risk-acceptance factor. It would be interesting to study that - I have never found research that touched on a similar match (I'd assume there's some cross-over with LEO, but not more than half).
bouncing in the UK has a,strong tie in with organised crime, certainly before they tightens up on the certification, the bouncing contract was part of a protection racket payment, that is now less so, but all the " security" companies around this way are run either directly or under cover by people who have a reputation in the under world.
we occasionally have bouncer,wars, were one,security company attacks another to get the good contracts
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,921
Reaction score
7,476
Location
Covington, WA
bouncing in the UK has a,strong tie in with organised crime, certainly before they tightens up on the certification, the bouncing contract was part of a protection racket payment, that is now less so, but all the " security" companies around this way are run either directly or under cover by people who have a reputation in the under world.
we occasionally have bouncer,wars, were one,security company attacks another to get the good contracts
That's old school.
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Manchester UK
That latter supports my hypothesis (because the mass also makes the job somewhat less risky), though that may be nothing more than confirmation bias. In fact, the first statement is pretty close to my point. People tend to be drawn to what they are likely to succeed at.

I suspect that there are few people who get into that line of work (specifically bouncer) who aren't a little bit thrill-seeking and fairly risk-tolerant, and used to being physically competent. I think those are personality traits likely to be common among sport competitors, too. There will certainly be exceptions to that, but those seem likely matches. And I'd expect that - in the current MA environment - folks who match those qualities are more likely to be drawn to the more obvious sports (BJJ, MMA, maybe Judo) and less to TMA. I suspect this actually bleeds some of the likely better competitors/fighters from TMA, increasing the need for inter-style training.
there is quite a possibility they are doing bouncing as they have no other viable alternative employment, certainly it has the,advantage of not having to get up in the morning, getting paid for standing around looking menacing AND seems to attract a fair number of young ladies who like the,strong silent bad boy type, and you occasionally get to punch a few,drunks, what's not to like
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
bouncing in the UK has a,strong tie in with organised crime, certainly before they tightens up on the certification, the bouncing contract was part of a protection racket payment, that is now less so, but all the " security" companies around this way are run either directly or under cover by people who have a reputation in the under world.
we occasionally have bouncer,wars, were one,security company attacks another to get the good contracts
Lovely. Sounds like feudal-era fun. Remind me not to live where you live, Jobo.
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Manchester UK
Lovely. Sounds like feudal-era fun. Remind me not to live where you live, Jobo.
yes it can get that way, a good few years ago, one of the foot soldiers decieded to beat me up over a,disputed game of pool i made quite a mess of him and two of his friends, which resulted in a number of very serious people on the look out for me to take revenge, i invoked the family loyalty clause as one of my many cousins is married to the leader of,a rival gang, hadnt seen her in twenty years, but family is family, when the,court case came round, ,there were gangs of twenty a side in court and an armed police presence, the whole thing was resolved when most most the people who were,after me got,10 years for armed robbery,
 

Paul_D

Master Black Belt
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
1,240
Reaction score
438
Location
England
When your fist meets on your opponent's face, will he feel any difference between whether you are doing self-defense, or you are doing fighting?
If you are defending yourself from a criminal, or have instead chosen to willingly go into the car park and fight to settle an argument, will the courts see the difference?

Yes, they will.

If you resist that assault through the application of violence (as opposed to just running away or crying for help), then you are now in a fight.
By your definition yes, but my definition I am defending myself from assault. Putting "fight" in your police statement does not go down quite so well as "defending myself from assault". Yes, while it is my definition (although not just my definition btw) , the problem with using the word fight is that it causes people to mistakenly believe that the fighting skills they use in the dojo/ring are the right tools for the job when it comes to dealing with SD from non consensual criminal violence, they are not. So I believe there is an important reason to make the distinction it's not just me being pedantic for the sake of it. We understand the difference of course, but with others here you have to spell it out for them where the distinction lies.

That's your own personal definition
No, it's not.

No I can't expect everyone to accept it, but I do explain why I make that definition, certain people just use the word "fight" to mean "agreeing to go out in a car park and fight to settle a disagreement" which is NOT SD, and an actual SD scenario. Certain posters here however use the same word for both without making the distinction, so you are never sure which they are referring to. They also assumes the skills set and the objective for both (and indeed the legal ramifications) are the same. They are not, I try to make the distinction so my position is made clear, even if people chose not to agree with my definition.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that lifestyle choices, awareness, target hardening, avoidance, and verbal de-escalation don't count as self-defense. I believe Jobo was making the point that if those all fail then fighting ability is the next level of self-defense. Thus his phrasing that "after the being careful stuff doesn't work, sd is then fighting". (I will concede that comments from Jobo in other threads seem to indicate he doesn't try that hard to succeed with those non-violent options in his daily life.)
I am not going to be so crass as to mention names, but there are plenty of people here who argue exactly that. Unless it is men brawling in a bar or the street it is not SD, and they argue it just as vehemently as I argue it is not.

A lot may depend on where you are, but many jurisdictions do not impose a duty to flee an attacker. I'm not familiar with U.K. law, but in many areas of the U.S. you are allowed to stand your ground against an assailant.
My posts are always form the point of view of UK law ( or at least as I understand it to be) I accept and understand laws are different in different locations, and people have to of course bear their own laws in mind at all times.

In general, I agree, although I could come up with exceptions for both of those scenarios.
Of course, there always are, I was generalising to demonstrate the difference between SD and fighting.

I would correct that to say "What counts as a "win" in fighting is not always the same as what counts as a "win" in SD and vice versa"
That would have been better yes, but I was running out of time, I could be here for hours pouring over every word and comma, but eventually you get to the point where you just have to hit post and trust people to get the general jist

On the other hand, if a young woman is faced with a would-be date rapist in her home, then a triangle choke may resolve the issue nicely. In fact, there have been several news reports of this happening.
Yes, of course. I'm not saying it isn't one solution, I am saying however it not the best solution. Waiting until you get attacked and then hoping your MA skills are better than the other persons is not the best way to approach SD. (I'm not saying that is your approach). That is however the approach of several here who continue to argue that SD only consists of men brawling in a bar/street.

It is also, in my experience, the solution favoured by many MA instructors who try to teach SD. They give no thought to (or at best only give lip service to) the soft skills which will keep you out of danger. We have all been on a course where the instructor says "If you're being strangled this is how you escape."

Wait, what? How have I ended up in a situation where I am being strangled. You cannot (in a SD course/lesson) just skip over the the entire sequence of events that has led me to the point where I am being strangled, as there were numerous chances to avoid ending up in the position, if you know what to do.

Agreed, with emphasis on the "necessarily." I'd argue that there is value for martial artist in knowing what skills transfer and which do not.
I would absolutely agree with that as well. But you cannot for love nor money get certain people here to understand that. They know how to fight, but because their only experience of violence is fighting in the dojo/ring/street, they assume all violence is the same, and the same skills can be applied across the board. They know a triangle choke works, they have done it in the ring and in the dojo, but try to explain to them that a triangle choke is not ideal in the middle of the street and instead what they hear is "Triangle chokes don't work at all."

I think we are pretty much in agreement, save a few inconsequential details. You know ultimately what I am trying to say, it's others here who need to understand the umbrella of SD casts its shadow a lot further than the single scenario of drunken men brawling in bars.

Thanks for reply Tony, hope I have clarified things a little better than I did before :)
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
10,540
Location
Hendersonville, NC
If you are defending yourself from a criminal, or have instead chosen to willingly go into the car park and fight to settle an argument, will the courts see the difference?

Yes, they will.
The court's view doesn't change the mechanics of the situation until afterwards. If someone attacks in a car park and you manage to disengage and gain a bit of space (but not enough to escape), the situation is markedly similar to what you'd be in if you stepped in there willingly to settle an argument.
 

Paul_D

Master Black Belt
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
1,240
Reaction score
438
Location
England
The court's view doesn't change the mechanics of the situation until afterwards. If someone attacks in a car park and you manage to disengage and gain a bit of space (but not enough to escape), the situation is markedly similar to what you'd be in if you stepped in there willingly to settle an argument.
Perhaps in some circumstances yes, but in others no. But mechanics wasn't the point I was demonstrating with this post.

The point I am making here is that if you willingly agree to fight someone in the street/bar you are not acting in SD, and so become legally responsible for the consequences, both legal and financial. If you are legally acting in SD then you are not responsible. So the courts deal with different scenarios in different ways.

Although KFW's question was flippant because he does not understand the difference, it is important to know you cannot just go round hitting people and then legally claiming the act of SD and illegally street fighting are the same just because the mechanics of a punch are the same. Also KFW, as do many, needs to understand that whilst there are some cross over skills between fighting and SD (a good punch is always a good punch) there are many skills which whilst successful in one arena are wholly unsuited to the other.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,921
Reaction score
7,476
Location
Covington, WA
Perhaps in some circumstances yes, but in others no. But mechanics wasn't the point I was demonstrating with this post.

The point I am making here is that if you willingly agree to fight someone in the street/bar you are not acting in SD, and so become legally responsible for the consequences, both legal and financial. If you are legally acting in SD then you are not responsible. So the courts deal with different scenarios in different ways.

Although KFW's question was flippant because he does not understand the difference, it is important to know you cannot just go round hitting people and then legally claiming the act of SD and illegally street fighting are the same just because the mechanics of a punch are the same. Also KFW, as do many, needs to understand that whilst there are some cross over skills between fighting and SD (a good punch is always a good punch) there are many skills which whilst successful in one arena are wholly unsuited to the other.
I think you have an interesting view on self defense. In many ways, I agree, but in a few key areas, I just don't. You continually emphasize that consensual violence is not self defense, but have also said that cops who engage in violence are engaging in self defense. How is it consensual on one hand and not on the other? A cop doesn't run away and in fact, often initiates the violence. How is that self defense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Discussions

Top