I noted that the charge is assault with a deadly weapon. This lends credence to the theory that a trained martial artist's hands and feet are indeed 'weapons'. It's also a very sad indictment on the boy, his upbringing, and perhaps his training.
Teen Black Belt Busted After Near-Deadly Kick
- Thread starter Bill Mattocks
- Start date
I noted that the charge is assault with a deadly weapon. This lends credence to the theory that a trained martial artist's hands and feet are indeed 'weapons'. It's also a very sad indictment on the boy, his upbringing, and perhaps his training.
Thank God I live in Washington State. Here, if you kick someone in the face you are in the same trouble a non-martial artist would be.
No. It lends credence to the idea of a prosecutor charging heavy hoping for a plea deal. As described in several places, under Virginia law, the most I'd expect would be malicious wounding. Arguments that the kick "could" have been fatal are sketchy. I'd like to hear what the doctor really said would have been the mechanism of death; I sure hope it wasn't "drive the nose bone into the brain" as one article listed.
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. I would suspect a plea to a lesser offense and maybe probation.
Heh heh. "Nose bone."
Other than that funny little tidbit, this is a sad, sad story. All around. A stupid kid makes a stupid mistake and will be paying the repercussions of that for a long long time. As will his victim. So sad.
I did a lot of stupid things when I was sixteen. Nothing quite this stupid, but stupid. That's how sixteen year olds behave. Stupidly. Especially sixteen year old boys. They're the stupidest. Such a sad story.
I hope he learns from this. I hope other kids do. I hope we all do. Then at least something good might come out of all this. I hope his victim is ok.
-Rob
Other than that funny little tidbit, this is a sad, sad story. All around. A stupid kid makes a stupid mistake and will be paying the repercussions of that for a long long time. As will his victim. So sad.
I did a lot of stupid things when I was sixteen. Nothing quite this stupid, but stupid. That's how sixteen year olds behave. Stupidly. Especially sixteen year old boys. They're the stupidest. Such a sad story.
I hope he learns from this. I hope other kids do. I hope we all do. Then at least something good might come out of all this. I hope his victim is ok.
-Rob
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
And, in fact, the philtrum, or medial cleft on the upper lip, is a more potentially deadly target than the nose. While the nose is potentially fatal-a strong strike to anywhere on the head might cause fatal braqin damage, or a nerve reaction causing vasodilation, or a basal skull fracture-a strike to the philtrum is even miore potentially fatal, with all the same possible mechanisms of death, and an increased chance for the least likely one, the basal skull fracture.
Kid clearly missed a few trips to the woodshed. I hate sore losers, and calling him that is a ridiculous understatement: I could understand (but not condone) an impulsive strike immediately after the decision was handed down, but to come out of the locker room like that.....sick.
Senjojutsu
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 258
- Reaction score
- 12
FWIW, there are many US state criminal statutes, such as Massachusetts, who define using a "shod foot" during a kicking assault to raise it to a felony charge level (deadly weapon). So did the sore loser dress (change) in the locker room before he came out with revenge in his heart?
Wise karate lawyer sensei once say; "Only go looking for trouble while barefoot in the park, or with beach sand in between your toes." [sarcasm]
Not condoning the action but is this "juvie" any different than daily examples of the twenty-someting, spoiled, millionaire athletes playing professionally these days - being interviewed on ESPN's Sport Center regarding an "extracurricular incident" that occurred during the game and justifying their own boorish behavior??
Absolutely. The kid doesn't have a leg to stand on -- he was wrong as a sportsman, he was wrong in a criminal sense, and he'll be wrong in any civil action. His coaches and instructors were also wrong; if they knew he had such a temper, they should have been on his butt to prevent anything like this from happening. (We'll ignore the whole issue of preventing through proper instruction ahead of time...) And I've got to wonder where his parents were, as well...
The key line that jumped out at me was this one ... the connection his foot made after the match ... this is a reflection (to me anyway) upon the kid's instructor more than on the kid themselves. The kid is a BB and he obviously hasn't learned restraint and acceptance that he lost after a match? Where were the instructor's teachings to learn restraint, control and acceptance of loss? Was this kid a "Cobra Kai" student?
Black Belt... how does one obtain that rank in his school and learn nothing about restraint?
Ok you lost the match... learn from it and deal with it and do better the next time.
I'm more disgusted with the BB's teachers than I am with the BB who did this. Likewise I side with JKS on being disgusted with the parents as well.
I assume this is the same incident?
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...o-contestants-have-altercation-before-contest
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...o-contestants-have-altercation-before-contest
That's truth, right there.
Every member of society is partially to blame for this incident since we live in a society that concents to violence and murder explicitly.
When a Police officer uses force on a person it is justified in our society, when a war criminal is sent back to the country of his origin and it is inevitable he will be found guilty and suffer the death penalty(think Saddam Hussein) all Countries responsible for overthrowing the regime are guilty of murder but society justifies it.
So if some teenager has trouble grasping the finer points of when violence and murder are okay it is societies fault for clearly teaching him that there are times it can be justified.
Personally I can think of no time when hurting another person can be justified, so take responsibility for the world you have created and realise sometimes your children will get wrong.
When a Police officer uses force on a person it is justified in our society, when a war criminal is sent back to the country of his origin and it is inevitable he will be found guilty and suffer the death penalty(think Saddam Hussein) all Countries responsible for overthrowing the regime are guilty of murder but society justifies it.
So if some teenager has trouble grasping the finer points of when violence and murder are okay it is societies fault for clearly teaching him that there are times it can be justified.
Personally I can think of no time when hurting another person can be justified, so take responsibility for the world you have created and realise sometimes your children will get wrong.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
I always have a hard time understanding when a so-called martial artist says something like this. Could you explain it?
Within Ninjutsu there is something called "Mushin" which essentially translates to a "no thought no emotion response" which is to say if someone were to pull a knife on me then I would be no more involved in the process which may result in an uncommon level of discomfort arising in the person than if that same person tried to climb Mount Everest naked in a thunder storm. The person may trigger reactions in the physical world by his actions but I personally would have no involvement in the result even though my physical body may be triggered to react accordingly.
In fact if I was thinking about the person at the time I would be wishing I could help them.
In fact if I was thinking about the person at the time I would be wishing I could help them.
Bull doo-doo.
I make no bones about it. You try to hurt me or mine, and I will stop you. With whatever level of force may be necessary. That may mean hurting or even killing anyone. Playing games about "it's not me, it's reaction" is dodging the reality of, just like the line about "shooting to stop the threat" is a nicety for public. That doesn't mean that I want to kill someone, that doesn't mean that I enjoy hurting someone... but I accept that if I do it -- I am the one doing it. Their choices and their actions may have led to the situation, but in the end, I am the person who used force against them. I accept that responsibility.
In the instant case, the kid lost his cool. He couldn't handle having lost, and he struck out at the kid who beat him. He did it in rather cowardly way, when the kid's attention was elsewhere, and he's going to have to accept his lumps upon conviction. Honestly, my guess is it never goes to trial criminally, and he pleads to something along the lines of malicious wounding or even simple assault. And I bet it doesn't go to a civil trial because Id' bet he'll be strongly advised to settle out early and generously. There is very little available at the moment to give him any justification.
David43515
Master Black Belt
You beat me to the punch. The first thing I thought of when I read the charge was that he must have put on shoes. It`s a fine point, but in some states it`s an important one backed up by a long history of caselaw.
You have certainly made it clear that you do believe there are times when violence can be justified which is something I will never concur with since at it's most basic level it gets down to the old, "two wrongs don't make a right".
While I can appreciate due to your profession for your own mental stability it may seem important to justify using force on someone but I believe any use of force is really resorting to poor tactics due to not having a better solution. I am pretty sure if you had a magic switch that could turn off a persons criminal intent you would use it rather than slap cuffs on them and write out a fine.
Rather than living in a society that spends "whatever it takes" to fix it's problems our society says oh well this is the best we have got lets just make do.
As an example I recently killed a Tiger snake that reared up to strike, I do not feel proud about it since it was my lack of ability that caused me to be in a position that for my own survival I had to kill it. With hind sight had I done a snake charmers course at the local zoo maybe I would have had the skills to better resolve the situation and the snake would still be alive.
Technically I would agree if you wanted to press the argument that using Mushin as an excuse is a cop-out and as an enlightened martial artist perhaps I could develop a fighting system that immobilized without causing injury or pain but this is the real world and I am not enlightened so the best I can do is hope I will never need it at all.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Hmmm. Don't think so.
In fact, the way you state it, mushin is justification for hurting another person.
Having an open mind, free of ego, fear or anger, doesn't mean that one isn't justified-color me cconfused.
Your confusion would come from an intentional omission on my part, not so much from the Mushin description which clearly indicates a no thought no emotion response but rather from my preceeding comments where it is omitted that I see societies responsibilities for the proliferation of violence stemming from "conscious/sentient/deliberate/intentional" acts of so called justifiable violence.
There is just no pulling the wool over your eyes.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Nah. I'm still confused.I'd start by questioning which "societies" you're referring to, and point out that, colelctively, mankind's history is an unending tale of the spilling of blood, from the earliest of our caveman ancestors to the present day.
Man's hands were made for clubs. Levers, caresses, other tools are all incidental to this, which was undoubtedly our very first tool.
If an act of violence doesn't justify a violent response-and please note, I'm not saying that violence is always the answer, just an answer that is often justified-then why learn to respond at all with violence, never mind violence without attachment to emotion or thought?
