Sport vs. Street

[Transk53]

That the LEO's honored a statute that they perceived to have existed, and therefor enforced it, which is their job.

So you are a wannbe Sheriff or something. I wonder if you're perception of enforcement fits a rational human being?

 

[Paul_D]

That the LEO's honored a statute that they perceived to have existed, and therefor enforced it, which is their job.

Which wasn't actually your original arguement at all.

 

[FriedRice]

Yes, but they could pull one at random. Or spend every possible moment pulling one over. Yet, they do not. They let many pass who are only speeding a little, and wait for someone who is speeding more.

Sounds like a logical plan to increase public safety to me, and I've driven over 150mph on highways before....not often, but not that rare neither. 100mph, not a big deal.

 

[FriedRice]

Willing to kill doesn't mean willing to kill in every circumstance. I think his point was that he's willing to kill if it is necessary. Thankfully, it almost never reaches that point.

You missed the point. Unless you think that there are secret sauce, death strikes....only reserved for when "it is necessary".

 

[FriedRice]

Yeah both of these. You really do miss the point, and yeah you seem to like the soind of your own voice.

What point? That you're making up martial arts terminology?

 

[FriedRice]

Willing to kill is a mindset and an attitude, every fight I go into I go in with the possibility that me or my opponent may be killed.
Thinking that my opponent may stop or is aim isn't to kill me is a foolish assumption, even unintended he still may kill me.

Isn't it quite foolish to assume that someone who's knocked out and on the ground, can intend to kill you?

 

[Transk53]

What point? That you're making up martial arts terminology?

That is, er WTF!!

 

[Paul_D]

That is, er WTF!!

I'm pleased I'm not the only one that thought that.

 

[FriedRice]

Then they are not fights, they are assaults.

No, they are not assaults....they're unplanned, coerced, tactical engagements....we call it, UCTE.

 

[Paul_D]

No, they are not assaults....they're unplanned, coerced, tactical engagements....we call it, UCTE.

But you were just arguing they were called fights. Make your mind up.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ah, now this is different. Now you are talking about techniques.

Before you were talking about skills.

If we are talking about techniques then yes I'd agree more with you there.

Okay, that might be where we have a difference in vocabulary. Define the difference between "skill" and "technique" as you use it, please.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You are probably right in that. The overlap though, just is another tool, and not one to be taken as consciousness thought. I mean if one is stupid enough to think a fancy kick is in order, the overlap is a window of opportunity. Yes a person can learn SD, yes a person can learn to fight, but the deire is another thing. Overlap in skills, there is no overlap.

So, I'll ask you the same thing I asked Paul for: please define your difference between "technique" and "skill".

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well since you admitted to not having watched the video that you're directly making an argument about, then how is what you're saying, credible?

Actually, I clearly commented on the first fight in the video, because that's what I watched. Care to comment on how I can't credibly comment on that?

Ever thought of using a less-confrontational approach?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No, they are not assaults....they're unplanned, coerced, tactical engagements....we call it, UCTE.

Okay, so you use use that term, and Paul uses the term "assaults". So, what happened to the "fights" you were saying weren't mutually agreed upon?

 

[FriedRice]

So you are a wannbe Sheriff or something. I wonder if you're perception of enforcement fits a rational human being?

Now you're just making things up out of anger b/c I've exposed your ignorance about that "TKD Kick".

 

[FriedRice]

Which wasn't actually your original arguement at all.

Yes it was. But what did you think my original argument was then?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sounds like a logical plan to increase public safety to me, and I've driven over 150mph on highways before....not often, but not that rare neither. 100mph, not a big deal.

Yes, logical. And it requires they exercise judgment, which was precisely my point.

 

[Paul_D]

Okay, that might be where we have a difference in vocabulary. Define the difference between "skill" and "technique" as you use it, please.

A technique would be punch/kick/lock/throw etc. Which could all potentially be used in self defence.

A skill would be the ability to move in and out of striking range (which in the context of our discussion is a useful fighting skill, but of little use in self defence as self defence does not take place at sparring distance).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You missed the point. Unless you think that there are secret sauce, death strikes....only reserved for when "it is necessary".

Nobody has referred even once to those, so no need to go there. I was referring to the comment someone else made. No need to act so condescending to everyone who disagrees. It is entirely possible to disagree with people and be civil. (Take a look at Paul's approach in our disagreement in this same thread.)

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Isn't it quite foolish to assume that someone who's knocked out and on the ground, can intend to kill you?

Isn't it foolish to say someone is saying something they aren't?