Discussion in 'General Weapons Discussion' started by The Martialist, Feb 20, 2008.
this is a good one too.
I'd prefer a collapsable baton over a set of "chuks", personally.
That was hillarious- I almost bought that one... Nyyyyyce
Personally i disagree with the use of any weapon - a weapon makes you weaker, somebody with the right training could easily disarm somebody with a nunchaku.
However i have been learning nunchaku for about half a year now - i have 3 sets
Foam with string - piece of crap
Oak with Chain - I dont like it to be honest its too wide on the grip
Oak with String - Love this one, its such a nice handle, and the fact there is no chain means when i do wristrolls (yeah freestyle i know) i don't pinch my skin in the chain.
Nowadays they just ain't practical - they are fairly useful in training, Hand eye coordination and also helps with multitasking in terms of doing multiple things at once (spinning, kicking, making sure you dont lose concentration, keeping an eye on your surroundings). Also theyre illegal nearly all over the world.
I also used mine for wrist rehabilitation (snapped my left wrist curling 26kg), and its helped quite alot i'd say. I have "sparred" with them before, my brother owns a set of Sai and we mess about occasionally, other than that the only real experience i have with hitting stuff is smashing light bulbs (5 and counting) and hitting punch bags with them.
But i would honestly reccommend anybody to get a set, not for practicalities of using them as a weapon, but for the hand eye coordination training and wrist strengthening (wood or heavy metal only though)
Unfourtunately phill, in order for your leaflet to be "textbook" you need to get some real nunchaku training.
It matters if you live in a state like Missouri......which has created civil immunity for anyone who uses CRIMINALLY justified force in defense of themselves or others.
A weapon makes you weaker? Man, someone should have told early man that when he fell out of the tree and picked up the first stick and rock.....he should have just practiced his empty hand! :sniper:
As to the Nunchaku, I don't know if anyone is aware of it.....but there were Police Nunchaku around for a while.....I believe Kevin Orcutt developed them.....calls them OPN's (Orcutt Police Nunchaku)..They were all the rage in my Academy class, my Defensive Tactics instructor was a friend of Kevin Orcutts.
Anyway...I took the training, actually carried them for a short time. They had some pretty good uses, mostly pain compliance......they were used for striking, but their MAIN use was as a leverage device, they had a double rope where most Nunchaku had a chain......and the end of the shaft that met the rope were squared off to create a pinching pressure.....incredibly painful when wrapped around a wrist, arm or ankle and twisted.
Problem was that they were too complicated (or, rather, too complicated for a nuckle dragger like me) to use effectively in the street.....and the strikes, while powerful.....suffered from the same fatal flaw as ALL flexible weapons......IT TAKES TO LONG TO RELOAD THE SWING!
So, I keep mine in my training gear as a momento....I occassionally dig them out and play with them. I replaced them with a 31' ASP baton and took up FMA instead.
At any rate, anyone interested in the concept, here's Kevin Orcutt's website. http://www.orcuttopn.com/
I do recommend checking the DOG BROTHERS 'Real Contact Stick Fighting: Stick versus Other Weapons' where the Dog Brothers show real contact stick fights between stick and Nanchuku...as well as staffs, sectional staffs, whips, tonfu, a wooden Sword and other assorted weapons.....VERY EYE OPENNING! http://www.dogbrothers.com/pages/multimedia.html
No need to be a sarcastic dork is there. I take it you don't read often, because various MA Authors such as Bruce Lee and Sifu Wong Kiew Kit (just off the top of my head) also suggest that weapons arn't as effective as Unarmed combat - with a weapon in your hand, there is less freedom to do things and the heavier the weapon is the harder it will be to use, meaning that an unnarmed combatant would easily have the upper hand. (and i am not talking about guns here).
I am also well aware of that police officer that developed nunchaku, and from my knowledge i understand they were popular for a short while - but they were too complicated to use for people.
The first book i ever read was "Dynamic Nunchaku" by Tadashi Yamashita, granted it is pretty ancient and the pictures are pretty funky, but if anybody who wants to start nunchaku its a fairly good read + you can tell right from the start of the book that the way phill has shown to grip his nunchaku is wrong. That Handling only works for pulling off spins and fancy tricks - which isn't much good for when somebody wants to attack you lol, can you seriosuly imagine going up to somebody and spinning a nunchaku above your head like in phills leaflet. Nunchak needs to be held on the lower half (personally i prefer nearer the bottom-middle gives more balance)
OK, square off unarmed with a knife wielding opponent (with malicious intent). Who do you think has the advantage? Same question with a bo, or escrima stick. Your position on this issue is naive, whether Bruce Lee supported it or not.
I like the chain with the padlocks.
ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.
-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Super Moderator-
Just because they said it doesn't mean it's true. History bears out the efficacy of armed over unarmed combat. Otherwise people wouldn't have developed weapons at all in the first place. Anyone who thinks that weapons aren't as effective as empty hands hasn't really faced someone with any amount of real weapons training, plain and simple.
@ Mark L
well, ok i'll use some of my real life experiences i'm a bouncer at a bar in town, and i've been threatened at knife point about 3 times so far (i've only been working for under a year). And every time i was able to lock the offenders arm and force him to release the knife.
There is my real life experience, and my proof that i have had a little weapons training in terms of dealing with people with them. You could say that "well they obviously didn't have any training", and that is probably true. But you said my thoughts are niave, i don't think they are considering i've faced the real deal.
i didn't say "because they said it, it must be true". I said they "Suggest" that weapons arn't as effective, and i personally feel the same way. Please read my posts carefully next time
You're a very lucky man.
That's the rub. All it proves is that someone with a huge advantage can still lose it through ineptitude. Remember the saying "Nothing is idiot-proof against a sufficiently talented idiot". Also, people are as a general rule reluctant to kill other people. Read some essays on "rates of fire", and the psychological readiness to kill. If someone isn't actually intending to gut you, then that's an advantage you have. If it's a situation where the opponent is willing to take a broken nose or whatever to stab you into the dirt, the scenario changes. Not that I'm presuming any knowledge of your experience, the fact that he threatened you rather than knifing you by ambush is a sign that he didn't actually want to kill you... perhaps he wanted to deter you in order to not lose face. Also, if the either combatant is timid, then he'll likely lose regardless. A weapon that someone isn't actually willing to use isn't really a weapon at all... it's a fashion statement.
I read it perfectly well, thank-you. History bears out that weapons trump empty hand. If it didn't, then you would have found empty-handed soldiers defeating armed and armoured knights en masse on the battlefields of Europe, and the Roman Legions would have conquered using bareknuckle boxing, but they didn't. The grabbed sharp pointy things and butchered their enemies. Weapons are expensive... if they didn't work, no one would have expended the resources to develop them in the first place.
There's plenty of need to be sarcastic if folks are spreading the silly notions that weapons aren't as effective as empty hands....notions that might get some one killed.....sarcasm is the surest cure for silliness.
I'm not intending to be rude, and if I come across as too blunt I apologize....but I think it's IMPORTANT to point out that the notion that empty hand is superior to a weapon is fundamentally flawed!
MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY! And for the record it's a misrepresentation of Bruce Lee's position to say that he claimed weapons were less effective than empty hands.
It's like saying a forklift is less effective at lifting boxes than empty hands.....or a knife is less effective at cutting steak than empty hands....or a shovel is less effective at digging a hole than empty hands!
A weapon is a tool, and tools add a physical advantage.....an unarmed man CAN overcome and armed man....ONLY if he has VASTLY superior skill......speed, surprise and violence of action! But if two men are equally matched, and one is ARMED, he will prevail, all other things being equal!
Your conclusions based on your anecdotal experience is dangerous to your health because of the assumptions it has created....a false confidence NOT supported by reality.
ANY man who believes that empty hand techniques are SUPERIOR to a knife is in for a rude, painful and possibly fatal awakening at some point in the future.
My intent isn't to be rude......but that is a dangerous notion to hold and spread......that because you've gotten luck and disarmed a couple people armed with knives, that you now conclude that your empty hand techniques are more than sufficient to deal with any knife attack. You might want to study the fate of a fellow bouncer named 'Tiny'.
As a cop, i've disarmed knife holders too......most of them were untrained, and most of them had no intention of stabbing me.....at the time of the disarm they were still trying to figure out WHAT they intended to do......THAT is not the same as dealing with a dedicated trained attacker intent on killing you! I've seen the results of that, and it's usually someone cut all to hell!
My intent isn't to be rude......but that is a dangerous notion to hold and spread......that because you've gotten luck and disarmed a couple people armed with knives, that you now conclude that your empty hand techniques are more than sufficient to deal with any knife attack. You might want to study the fate of a fellow bouncer named 'Tiny'. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...AA25757C0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
Despite the New York Slimes usual hyperbole, and their inability to get the story accurate......to make a long story short, Umali used his knife to open up 'Tiny' femoral artery with a single strike.....'Tiny' bled out in a matter of a couple of minutes. I'm not even sure if 'Tiny' even knew what happened to him. That is the power of a weapon......to do in a fraction of a second what one could not do with their bare hands.
Absolutely! While we talk very much about the 'unarmed' skills of past warriors.....we forget that they were used very infrequently as most conflict was settled with a sword, or spear, or arrow, or club, or stick, etc, etc, etc,.....an unarmed man has almost ZERO chance against a trained armed man.....especially if he doesn't have the element of surprise.
Contrary to population myth, unarmed men did not roam the land fighting men armed with swords with their bare hands......that didn't happen until Hollywood was invented!
Historically, unarmed defenses didn't take fore front until some government or other banned ARMS as a method of defense.....therefore, unarmed skills, such as developed on Okinawa, were the result of necessity, not choice....given the choice, a man will pick up a WEAPON rather than use his bare hands.......a man educated in conflict would no more voluntarily engage in a life or death fight without a weapon than he'd CHOOSE to dig a HOLE without a shovel!
Mac and Langen, I just wanted to congratulate you both on a string of posts that totally removed my ability to add anything to this thread :lol:.
About all I can say, as someone with more than a decade of training in empty-hand (which I've used to practical effect in the 'real world') and half-a-decade of training in the Japanese Sword Art of Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu, is that a weapon is a force multiplier. Just like a hammer or a pair of pliers. Someone trained in the use of the tool can achieve effects an order of magnitude greater than either someone without the tool or sans the training.
To give a relevant anecdote, my iaido sensei is also very highly skilled in karate and aikido. When I was an unskilled kyu grade, he could disarm me at will (using bokken for safety of course). Now I'm a nidan, he has to work much harder and makes clear that, if shinken were involved, he'd probably fail. That's because an experienced swordsman does not give the opening for empty-hand techniques to work (the proviso being that the unarmed chap is not more skilled than the armed one).
Andy, I trained in Lau Gar Kung Fu, a legacy descendant of Bruce's Jeet Kune Du and altho' I've read that he thought that using a weapon 'limited' your options, in context I've never heard it said that fighting unarmed versus an armed opponent was a bad idea.
I don't want you to feel assailed here tho' and I'd be happy to read any sources you can point to that have relevance to this issue.123
Separate names with a comma.