Post Zimmerman public perception of Ground & Pound

[lklawson]

Here's a question for my Martial Arts friends. What impact will the Zimmerman trial have on martial arts in general and MMA in particular? To be specific, one of the key elements of the Self Defense narrative was that Martin had achieved a Mount position and was striking Zimmerman repeatedly and that this was crucial in Zimmerman's asserted mind set that he was in fear for his life or Great Bodily Harm. Now, let's be clear here, I don't want to discuss the merits of whether or not Zimmerman or Martin committed any crime or if Zimmerman was guilty of anything. We're not discussing Zimmerman. I'm focusing on the impact that this specific element has had/will have on martial arts, MMA, and the general public's perception of them. Of note is that many of Zimmerman's advocates, particularly noted talk show host Sean Hannity, appear to have played up this particular element, referring to it repeatedly as, "Ground and Pound, MMA style, raining punches" and clearly implying this was an extremely dangerous situation for the bottom person; a clear threat of Serious Bodily Harm or worse.

What do you think? In YOUR estimation, how "dangerous" is a G&P (sans ref.) and how will the rhetoric about G&P from the Zimmerman trial now associated with G&P impact the general public perception of martial arts in general and MMA in specific?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Steve]

Kirk,

I have two thoughts on this. First, I personally believe that this will have, overall, a negative impact on the reputation of MMA. This just feeds into the negative preconceptions that some people have regarding the martial artists who participate in MMA, and that's a shame. Ground and Pound is VERY effective, and people who believe that they will simply avoid the ground will be in a world of trouble if taken to the ground by a person who has ill intent.

The second thought is one that I brought up in one of the Zimmerman threads, and that's my belief that a lay person will not be able to distinguish between mount and guard. As martial artists, the distinction is pretty clear. But to a lay bystander, they will look the same. And so, the perceived danger of the person on the ground could be skewed.

 

[Kurai]

I think it will do more to put MMA in a negative light, undeservedly so. Just as the actions of James Michael Biela did, with his use of the Rear Naked Choke, as a means to subdue his victims.

 

[Carol]

I don't see much impact.

I think that 3 months, 6 months, a year, two years from now, MMA will have the same amount of controversy that it has today.

 

[lklawson]

I think it will do more to put MMA in a negative light, undeservedly so. Just as the actions of James Michael Biela did, with his use of the Rear Naked Choke, as a means to subdue his victims.

As an example of how media hype can have an effect on public opinion, I still remember when misuse of "The Sleeper Hold" (aka "Rear Naked Choke"/Hadaka Jime) by some prison guards lead to the death of inmates (they crushed the trachea) and gave Professional Wrestling (yes, that "Professional Wrestling") a huge negative image to the public at large. This was 30+ years ago. It lead to "The Sleeper Hold" being banned for use by Correctional Officers. Pro wrestlers were on TV for a month explaining that the hold, properly applied, is safe and what they do is safe entertainment. Sound familiar?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...A5IAAAAIBAJ&sjid=w-4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=7194,2385587

And, for those firearms enthusiasts, remember the shock, outrage, and hype over the use of Black Talon bullets? Essentially nothing more than any other expanding "hollow point" bullet, just with a black colored Lubalox lube coating. But the public outrage and political pressure lead to Winchester changing the name and removing the Lubalox coating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_talon

So there is definite precedent that this sort of national media attention, even if due to public misunderstanding and misinformation, can cause large changes in policy and product.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[MJS]

Here's a question for my Martial Arts friends. What impact will the Zimmerman trial have on martial arts in general and MMA in particular? To be specific, one of the key elements of the Self Defense narrative was that Martin had achieved a Mount position and was striking Zimmerman repeatedly and that this was crucial in Zimmerman's asserted mind set that he was in fear for his life or Great Bodily Harm. Now, let's be clear here, I don't want to discuss the merits of whether or not Zimmerman or Martin committed any crime or if Zimmerman was guilty of anything. We're not discussing Zimmerman. I'm focusing on the impact that this specific element has had/will have on martial arts, MMA, and the general public's perception of them. Of note is that many of Zimmerman's advocates, particularly noted talk show host Sean Hannity, appear to have played up this particular element, referring to it repeatedly as, "Ground and Pound, MMA style, raining punches" and clearly implying this was an extremely dangerous situation for the bottom person; a clear threat of Serious Bodily Harm or worse.

What do you think? In YOUR estimation, how "dangerous" is a G&P (sans ref.) and how will the rhetoric about G&P from the Zimmerman trial now associated with G&P impact the general public perception of martial arts in general and MMA in specific?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

IMHO, given the fact that the general public (non martial artists) as a whole, are clueless for the most part, about anything MA related, usually basing their opinions and knowledge, off of what they see on tv and in movies, yes, what happened in the GZ case, will probably be frowned upon. I mean, think about it....when people hear the words "cage fighting" I'm sure you can imagine the things that go thru their head..lol. They get a bad picture, when in reality, with the added rule set and more focus on fighter safety, it's safer than most think.

How dangerous is the G&P? Well, given the fact that alot of people tend to watch and mimic what they see, rather than get actual training at a real school, the g&p is something that isn't new to fighting and should, IMO, be taken very seriously. I remember when I first started posting on these forums...I'd do ALOT of talking about the importance of grappling, and having at the least, a basic understanding of it. People would piss and moan, say that it wasn't necessary, that they'd never end up on the ground, etc, etc. My intent was not to make them leave their base art, but instead to get with the times, and learn some basics.

As someone who grapples a hell of alot more than me, I'm sure Steve can attest to the importance and the value of 1 or 2 months of solid grappling training.

In the end, I highly doubt this incident will greatly effect MMA. The UFC, Strikeforce and all of the other MMA type events will still carry on, mainly due to their devoted fans. I highly doubt Dana is going to fold up because of the views a few non MAists have of the GZ case.

Just my .02

 

[chinto]

I think that if you are mounted and doing ground and pound in most states you will be considered to be using excessive force. that will be weather your a Black Belt in BJJ or just some guy. if it continues more then 2 or 3 punches it will often be considered by juries as initiation of Deadly force, or risk of great bodily harm! that is the legal ramifications, and I do not think it is any different then some one " working" some one on the ground 40 years ago in that case!

As to MMA, I see any impact as very small and will provably not last. But remember that that is in the ring, on the street just as the same thing was called "working" some one back in High School in the early 1970's, out side the ring it will be seen as an attempt to do grievous harm.

 

[Grenadier]

The negative perception will linger for a while, maybe months, or even a year or two. It all depends on how much the media is willing to do to create something out of nothing.

As with all negative hype, it will fade with the passage of time. It used to be that the term "baton" sounded so evil, after the Rodney King situation, or how the term "AR-15" was hyped to be a weapon of mass destruction. These days, it's nothing but an afterthought.

 

[lklawson]

I remember when I first started posting on these forums...I'd do ALOT of talking about the importance of grappling, and having at the least, a basic understanding of it. People would piss and moan, say that it wasn't necessary, that they'd never end up on the ground, etc, etc. My intent was not to make them leave their base art, but instead to get with the times, and learn some basics.

I can't tell you how many times I had the exact same merry-go-round ride.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[geezer]

I agree with Chinto. Personally, if some thug attacked me, took me to the ground, got me in a mount and began whaling on my face, I'd definitely feel that my life could be in danger and resort to any means necessary to stop him.

MMA is a fair contest between trained athletes with a referee present. By contrast, G & P if you are assaulted on the street may indeed be considered deadly force. I think most people can grasp that distinction.

As far as the verdict in the Zimmerman - Martin case, I have no public opinion. God only knows what really went down. I will say that from the facts that were made public, Zimmerman sure messed up ...if you believe as I do that awareness and avoidance are the first principles of self-defense.

 

[Steve]

Here's a question I have for you guys. If I hit you three times and knock you unconscious, do you think it would be viewed as more brutal from mount or from standing? Same situation. Same people and same end result: you bloody and asleep for a while. Picture on one hand a three strike combination. On the other hand, you're mounted and take three punches.

 

[lklawson]

As far as the verdict in the Zimmerman

This thread isn't for that and should be left out of it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Here's a question I have for you guys. If I hit you three times and knock you unconscious, do you think it would be viewed as more brutal from mount or from standing? Same situation. Same people and same end result: you bloody and asleep for a while. Picture on one hand a three strike combination. On the other hand, you're mounted and take three punches.

If you're talking about the risk of serious head injury due to unguided falling from going unconscious while standing vs. going unconscious while on the ground, both without any further attacks, then yes, ground is obviously safer.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Steve]

If you're talking about the risk of serious head injury due to unguided falling from going unconscious while standing vs. going unconscious while on the ground, both without any further attacks, then yes, ground is obviously safer.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

No, Kirk. I'm just talking about what it would look like. If the idea of the thread is to discuss how this court case will impact the image of MMA and G&P, I think it will create an image of brutality in the lay person. Which one do you think would be perceived as more brutal? All things being equal, the image, particularly as a result of this trial, of a person mounted on another person will be perceived as more brutal.

 

[Kframe]

Whats funny is, you can still get newly made black talon bullets. They are Winchesters SXT line. It just there average priced mainstream self defense bullet. It is in fact the black talon with out the lubalox like was mentioned earlier.

What is funny about this, is most libby gun grabbers still freak out at the mention of black talons, yet compared to the modern self defense ammo available since their invention, they are average in performance at best. The new Federal HST for example performs far more consistently then the black talons/SXT bullets do.

I see it having some temporary impact, but nothing lasting. If anything it should be kind of a wake up call to every martial artist. If Z had a few months of proper grappling training, he would have been instructed in the proper defense and escape from GNP. The escape from mount and GNP was among the first things we were taught and we revisit it frequently. It is so important, I do not feel that grappling should be ignored by the general martial arts crowd any more..

You don't need to go out and add full time bjj training to your training schedule. All im advocating is just a little bit of time each week dedicated to escaping various positions from the ground and defending against GNP and various submissions..

 

[jks9199]

Here's a question I have for you guys. If I hit you three times and knock you unconscious, do you think it would be viewed as more brutal from mount or from standing? Same situation. Same people and same end result: you bloody and asleep for a while. Picture on one hand a three strike combination. On the other hand, you're mounted and take three punches.

You're on the right track, here. Use of force is assessed on a case-by-case basis. The key question is whether or not a reasonable person would conclude that the force in question is LIKELY to cause serious bodily OR death. Someone's knocked on their ***, their assailant climbs on top of them, and starts raining punches on the guy's head? I think there's a damn good chance to conclude that there is a significant likelihood of serious bodily harm or death. That said -- it's also going to turn on what effect those punches are having, how long they go on, and what else the assailant* is doing. It's not something that we can stand here and say "this is deadly force; this is not..." A series of 2 or 3 deliberately glancing blows, designed to inflict confusion and minimal damage is different than a single full force punch, intending to drive the victim's head all the way through to China. (Or maybe South America for you Aussies...)

*Assailant: No matter who started it, it's likely -- though not certain -- that once they gain the upper hand, and begin to inflict more damage than was necessary to safely escape, they have probably become an assailant and aggressor.

 

[jks9199]

If you're talking about the risk of serious head injury due to unguided falling from going unconscious while standing vs. going unconscious while on the ground, both without any further attacks, then yes, ground is obviously safer.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

It's settled law; you take your victim as you find them. If someone punches a guy in the head, the guy turns out to already have a broken neck (there's a fancy term, but the neck can be broken, and everything stay in place...unless and until something drastic happens), and that hook punch severs the spinal cord -- they may well be charged with manslaughter or murder. I don't recall exactly, but I believe that's a synopsis of one of the key cases on the issue. Same thing if they just punched the guy, and he fell back, tripping over a curb and landing right on a rock that shatters their skull. In fact, I know an off-duty cop who was in another state was charged in a similar set of circumstances within the last few years.

 

[Makalakumu]

Here's a question I have for you guys. If I hit you three times and knock you unconscious, do you think it would be viewed as more brutal from mount or from standing? Same situation. Same people and same end result: you bloody and asleep for a while. Picture on one hand a three strike combination. On the other hand, you're mounted and take three punches.

That's a good question. I think if you knock someone out standing, the perception is that both people have neither advantage or disadvantage. In the mounted position, the person on top clearly has the advantage.

As far as being more dangerous, that depends on the surface the head could strike during the striking or after the knockout is complete. You can die from both. I think that someone who has a clear advantage with a mount and begins to press the action with strikes is escalating the use of force beyond standing striking. The advantage gained by the mount is not something you can get with standing striking.

 

[TKDTony2179]

Here's a question for my*Martial Arts*friends. What impact will the Zimmerman trial have on*martial arts*in general and MMA in particular? To be specific, one of the key elements of the Self Defense narrative was that Martin had achieved a Mount position and was striking Zimmerman repeatedly and that this was crucial in Zimmerman's asserted mind set that he was in fear for his life or Great Bodily Harm. Now, let's be clear here, I don't want to discuss the merits of whether or not Zimmerman or Martin committed any crime or if Zimmerman was guilty of anything.*We're not discussing Zimmerman.*I'm focusing on the impact that this specific element has had/will have on*martial arts, MMA, and the general public's perception of them. Of note is that many of Zimmerman's advocates, particularly noted talk show host Sean Hannity, appear to have played up this particular element, referring to it repeatedly as, "Ground and Pound, MMA style, raining punches" and clearly implying this was an extremely dangerous situation for the bottom person; a clear threat of Serious Bodily Harm or worse.What do you think? In*YOUR*estimation, how "dangerous" is a G&P (sans ref.) and how will the rhetoric about G&P from the Zimmerman trial now associated with G&P impact the general public perception of*martial arts*in general and MMA in specific?

First I do believe that g&p is very much dangerous. Having someone pound your head in and bouncing it off the ground would scare the mess out of me.

Secondly I think people may think of training in ground fighting more to protect themselves or just get a gun.

Now my thought is this though. If you train at a mma school for a yr and after a year you can not protect yourself on the ground with at least a bridge, control the head, or even punch back will say to the rest of the world that unless you have years to train then might as well get a gun.

 

[MJS]

Here's a question I have for you guys. If I hit you three times and knock you unconscious, do you think it would be viewed as more brutal from mount or from standing? Same situation. Same people and same end result: you bloody and asleep for a while. Picture on one hand a three strike combination. On the other hand, you're mounted and take three punches.

I'd say it'd look worse if you were actually in the mount. That is clearly, IMO, a position of dominance, of control. The bottom guy is really screwed if he doesn't know what he's doing.