Here is a clip on Stephen Hayes art of To Shin Do.
Last edited by a moderator:
To Shin Do Video Clip on Youtube!
- Thread starter Brian R. VanCise
- Start date
Grey Eyed Bandit
Master of Arts
For all their talk of training in accordance with self defense legalities, they sure seem to like to hit people when they're already lying down...
That stuck out at me as well. This type of clip can be a danger. If one of his students is involved in some sort of attack, the scumbag's lawyer could try to use this as "proof" that they were trained to hit people when they were down on the ground and not a threat. There have been cases where people have defended themselves and later been sued for doing so. If you have something like this floating around, it really helps the scumbag to paint a picture of a mad dog martial artist who was just hoping for a chance to go off on some poor person and went overboard.
Darksoul
Black Belt
-Having heard of Stephen Hayes, though not being familiar with his work, my question would be this: is he teaching battlefield techniques? As in take your enemy down and finish him off? That would make sense to me for all the hits on the person when they're down in the video. Certainly a person could train for that though hopefully if they're in a fight, he or she will only take it as far as necessary. Just a thought.
A--->
A--->
Interesting clip and thoughts. I know nothing about To Shin Do but how does what they were doing differ from a follow-up? Isn't it normal to teach follow-up techniques?
I know one person who is a black belt in To Shin Do. He received his bb in Japan from Hatsumi. I have never seen him demonstrate anything but I am aware of several times that he was bullied as a young adult (I'm thinking he probably around 20 or so at the time) and he did nothing to defend himself. He had been already been training for quite some time when this was occuring. One time he landed in the hospital with a broken jaw. All that to say, I don't know what the philosophy of the art is, but I found it odd that he did never used any of his martial arts training to defend himself against this group.
I know one person who is a black belt in To Shin Do. He received his bb in Japan from Hatsumi. I have never seen him demonstrate anything but I am aware of several times that he was bullied as a young adult (I'm thinking he probably around 20 or so at the time) and he did nothing to defend himself. He had been already been training for quite some time when this was occuring. One time he landed in the hospital with a broken jaw. All that to say, I don't know what the philosophy of the art is, but I found it odd that he did never used any of his martial arts training to defend himself against this group.
That does not seem to be what he tries to portray his art as. With his use of pads and modern training techniques, he seems to be trying to make it a valid, self defense art for the modern age. But this clip is suicide in a court case after having to use this stuff.
And Jade Tigress, you will have to ask your friend. I don't know why someone would not use what they had learned in that situation.
Monadnock
2nd Black Belt
If I saw the same clip, it appears that the attacker still had a knife in his hand after the takedowns. With the defender only with a stick, I think the disarms were warrented even with the attacker on the ground.
Grey Eyed Bandit
Master of Arts
In that case, there are better targets for multiple follow-up stick strikes than the torso.
"For all their talk of training in accordance with self defense legalities, they sure seem to like to hit people when they're already lying down..."
Looks that way. I can see it being useful if there were more than one attacker you were dealing with, in which case a blow to the face to "keep them down" may be needed to ensure that he won't get back up and help his friends take you down. However that is not the way it has been portrayed here and i think it could have done a better job in that.
Looks that way. I can see it being useful if there were more than one attacker you were dealing with, in which case a blow to the face to "keep them down" may be needed to ensure that he won't get back up and help his friends take you down. However that is not the way it has been portrayed here and i think it could have done a better job in that.
No.
First guy does a great example of a legal defense. The attacker still has the knife in his hand and is taken down. No beating after the guy is down but the hand holding the knife is controlled. The next guy and the guy after that clearly are beating on someone without a knife in their hand or having the knife hand in control. The third guy is Hayes. So that is the standard that all Toshindo folks will be judged by in a court of law. Hayes is clearly beating on someone on the ground even though they can't get him with their knife because he has control of that hand.
Just let some lawyer get thier hands on this clip and Toshindo folks that send someone to the hospital will have to pay several thousands of dollars in legal fees and hope they get off with just that.
lalom
Green Belt
Any lawyers here? Or is this personal opinion?
Not to split hairs but....
I doubt he got his Toshindo 'shodan' maybe his Bujinkan 'Shodan' in Japan.
Interesting...
Monadnock
2nd Black Belt
Heh, OK. I'd have to rewatch it. Those fuzzy little web vids don't always come across clear. But this stirs up the whole legal thing about self defense. Anyone know if there is a lot of precedence in these types of things? I think it varies state to state here in the US.
Cruentus
Grandmaster
With what I do, I know a little bit more about legalities then the average person, but I am not an attorney. I have consulted with attorneys regarding similar issues, however.
My opinion:
For one, the criteria for use of force is that you can continue until the attacker stops. Being on the ground, whether you put the attacker there or not, doesn't necessarily mean that the attacker has "stopped." Plus, if the attacker has a knife (and in those clips the knife was often still in the hand of the attacker while the uke was on the ground) then that is a lethal force scenario. One could argue that as long as the attacker was willing to fight, you had to continue your defense (hitting him with your cane while trying to control the knife hand in this case) because with access to a knife, letting the attacker off the ground to continue his onslaught opens you up to grave bodily damage or death. One could argue that that is what they were practicing on the video.
Now, on the other hand, one could expect that the opposing attorney will use anything available to discredit the defendant, including any martial arts footage that might seem incriminating. Pocket folders become "military knives," training for self-defense becomes "mercinary or militia or terrorist training," video games or scary movies or the latest issue of SWAT magazine makes you "obsessed with violence," and on and on and on. If you ever end up in court for using force, about the only thing you can count on is the opposing council using every tactic they can to paint a horrible picture of you.
So what is the right answer? There isn't one. You could never put video footage out there and never let anyone see you train, and the opposing attorney could argue that you are training in secret to be a mercinary, and that you were a mutual combatant who goaded their client into a fight so you could use your mercinary skills. And no, I am not kidding.
Point? There is no black and white answer, as it comes down to the totality of the evidence, reasonableness, and most importantly, who's attorney can "beat up" who in the courtroom.
There are only certain things that are clear ethical violations that could pose a serious legal problem to the trainers down the line, but I wouldn't say that this footage would fall into that category.
Paul
My opinion:
For one, the criteria for use of force is that you can continue until the attacker stops. Being on the ground, whether you put the attacker there or not, doesn't necessarily mean that the attacker has "stopped." Plus, if the attacker has a knife (and in those clips the knife was often still in the hand of the attacker while the uke was on the ground) then that is a lethal force scenario. One could argue that as long as the attacker was willing to fight, you had to continue your defense (hitting him with your cane while trying to control the knife hand in this case) because with access to a knife, letting the attacker off the ground to continue his onslaught opens you up to grave bodily damage or death. One could argue that that is what they were practicing on the video.
Now, on the other hand, one could expect that the opposing attorney will use anything available to discredit the defendant, including any martial arts footage that might seem incriminating. Pocket folders become "military knives," training for self-defense becomes "mercinary or militia or terrorist training," video games or scary movies or the latest issue of SWAT magazine makes you "obsessed with violence," and on and on and on. If you ever end up in court for using force, about the only thing you can count on is the opposing council using every tactic they can to paint a horrible picture of you.
So what is the right answer? There isn't one. You could never put video footage out there and never let anyone see you train, and the opposing attorney could argue that you are training in secret to be a mercinary, and that you were a mutual combatant who goaded their client into a fight so you could use your mercinary skills. And no, I am not kidding.
Point? There is no black and white answer, as it comes down to the totality of the evidence, reasonableness, and most importantly, who's attorney can "beat up" who in the courtroom.
There are only certain things that are clear ethical violations that could pose a serious legal problem to the trainers down the line, but I wouldn't say that this footage would fall into that category.
Paul
ginshun
2nd Black Belt
I think you guys are reading a little bit much into the hitting after the guy is down. Who teaches that once a guy hits the ground the threat is gone? Nobody that I have ever heard of.
Plus nobody here actually knows the context of the situation being trained. I would venture to guess that if a guy is coming after you with a knife its a pretty damn serious situation and you could probably get away with hitting him in the ribs if you manage to throw him without getting killed.
I'm no lawyer, but I doubt a jury is going to convict me of anything for hitting a guy in the ribs after he tries to stab me.
Yup, I just watched all the vids again, and didnt' see anythign that I would consider exsessive use of force. A hit to the ribs of a guy that just attacked to with a knife is not excessive IMO, and that is all I saw happening.
Seems like a case of Buj guys being overly critical of Hayes, but I could be wrong.
Plus nobody here actually knows the context of the situation being trained. I would venture to guess that if a guy is coming after you with a knife its a pretty damn serious situation and you could probably get away with hitting him in the ribs if you manage to throw him without getting killed.
I'm no lawyer, but I doubt a jury is going to convict me of anything for hitting a guy in the ribs after he tries to stab me.
Yup, I just watched all the vids again, and didnt' see anythign that I would consider exsessive use of force. A hit to the ribs of a guy that just attacked to with a knife is not excessive IMO, and that is all I saw happening.
Seems like a case of Buj guys being overly critical of Hayes, but I could be wrong.
lalom
Green Belt
Thank you Paul.
If you liked what Paul wrote, you should listen to what he said about what the other attorny would try to do to you.
I take it from your quote that you will do whatever you want unless someone with a law degree tells you it is bad.
Well, I have a lawyer on retainer. I have talked and been lectured by a prosecuting attorney by the name of Alain Buresse as well as studying the works of Masaad Ayoob and talking with a former prececuter. What have you done to determine that you are safe legally?
As Paul said, the lawyer facing you will use anything to try to make you look bad and maybe put you away or take a lot of cash from you. That includes looking on the internet for anything that might indicate you were trained to hit people on the ground. They only have to convice a jury that you were out of bounds. And stuff like this looks bad. Yes, there may be times when you need to hit someone on the ground- but putting in on the internet so you can face it later in court is another matter. There are other things that could have been put up in its place.
Ask anyone who has faced the legal system after defending themselves. It can cost you thousands of dollars even if you stay out of jail. Whoever put this clip on the internet made a bit harder for students to cover themselves legally in the future. If you do not want to believe me, then do the research yourself since it will be your own freedom at stake if it comes down to it.
But whatever you do, don't think that just because you did not do anything wrong that you will be ok. Talk to a lawyer before you get into trouble.
Start by readingthis page.
He appears on every episode of Personal Defense TV and as I have indicated in the link they often talk about this type of thing. In episode seven (see Post #14) he talks about what to say to the police when they arrive on the scene and how important it is to lay the groundwork for the coming legal aftermath by choosing your words carefully. He uses a five-point framework of what to say to the police, including an emphasis on saying very soon "I will sign a complaint (against the other person)" to start them thinking that you are the victim here despite still being standing.
And you'll be compelled during discovery to identify where, and under what user names, you have posted.
I wish I had a link to the Black Belt article from many years ago detailing just how many tens of thousands of dollars the well-known TKD instructor Hee Il Cho paid in the 1970s for breaking the teeth of someone who attacked him in his school. He won the battle...
I have no idea. I don't know anything about Toshindo and Bujinkan, I'm sure my terminology is wrong. I don't know him well, he is the son of a close friend but I don't see her often. All I know is he has been training at a Quest center for years and travelled to Japan a couple years ago with his instructor and some other students. Apparently he didn't know he would be receiving his bb. The story I have is he was asked to demonstrate and was then presented with his bb by Hatsumi. I do not have details, this is all second hand from his mother, and I don't really care. It just struck me as odd when he was getting his butt kicked all over the place when he was already a quite a few years into training.
