What MA cliches wind you up?

[Reeksta]

In general I love the conversations I have with people in the martial arts community, both face to face and online. However, certain phrases I hear repeated ad nauseum wind me up a little, such as:
"[Insert name of martial art here] was created to allow smaller, weaker people to beat larger, stronger opponents" - of course it was. All martial arts were. To my knowledge no MA was created with the purpose of allowing bigger people to beat up those smaller than themselves.
"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" - usually used to justify a needlessly violent response to a situation. The problem I have with this is that it's such a grotesque oversimplification. 99% of situations will not require you to kill someone else in order to save your own life (unless you do a particularly dangerous job, in which case fair enough). Personally I would rather be neither dead nor on trial for murder/attempted murder/GBH and believe that it should almost always be possible to achieve this.
Are there any martial arts cliches like this which annoy you?

 

[ballen0351]

"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" - usually used to justify a needlessly violent response to a situation. The problem I have with this is that it's such a grotesque oversimplification. 99% of situations will not require you to kill someone else in order to save your own life (unless you do a particularly dangerous job, in which case fair enough). Personally I would rather be neither dead nor on trial for murder/attempted murder/GBH and believe that it should almost always be possible to achieve this.
Are there any martial arts cliches like this which annoy you?

I don't take it to mean that. I hear it and think do what needs to be done to stay safe worry about the consequences after your safe.

Here's what happens when you let thoughts other then your safety dictate your response. This dude should have been dropped.
Chased by Man With Knife Officers Don t Shoot Due to Recent Incidents - News - POLICE Magazine

Two Milwaukee police officers considered "recent incidents locally and nationally" when they refrained from shooting a man who chased them with a butcher knife at the scene of a suspected double homicide,

Two officers arrived on scene and encountered a shirtless Martinez holding a large butcher knife and threatening to kill them. Martinez began chasing the officers around parked vehicles as they yelled at him to drop the knife, and one of the officers even indicated that she was "beginning to wear out from the running,"

Bring a knife to a gun fight you should loose.

 

[Buka]

Ads in local newspapers or periodicals concerning Martial Arts schools -

What makes our school different..

Hell, ALL schools are different.

 

[Reeksta]

Do officers in Milwaukee not carry tazers (genuine question; I honestly have no idea but this would seem an ideal situation to use them if so)?

 

[Reeksta]

Ads in local newspapers or periodicals concerning Martial Arts schools -

What makes our school different..

Hell, ALL schools are different.

Great example

 

[Buka]

Another that I've heard too often over the years, mostly from youngsters or lower ranks -

"Oh, my instructor couldn't spar with us. He'd kill someone."

Love their faith, though.

 

[Mephisto]

I don't take it to mean that. I hear it and think do what needs to be done to stay safe worry about the consequences after your safe.

Here's what happens when you let thoughts other then your safety dictate your response. This dude should have been dropped.
Chased by Man With Knife Officers Don t Shoot Due to Recent Incidents - News - POLICE Magazine




Bring a knife to a gun fight you should loose.

You're using LEOs as an example of the "better tried by 12 than carried by 6" argument? The op makes great points. There are too many cliches that are repeated without though or question. The mentioned quote is one example and an excuse some use to be ignorant of the law. "Survival at all costs" is another oversimplicaction. If you're aware of the law you can act accordingly. If you do kill a person you'll have to prove that it was your only option. The above mentioned quotes are setting your students up for trouble.

 

[Mephisto]

I've mentioned here before the "individual is more important than style" is a quote that's often repeated as a fact and I'd say just the opposite os true or at least it's up for debate.

My stance is that real encounters will involve an aggressive resisting opponent. Systems that train regularly with aggressive and resisting partners will best equip their students for reality. Sport systems are some of the best at giving students this type of training. Better yet a sport base with some self defense specific training. But systens that train dead patterns on compliant partners often espouse that they are training for reality and decry sport systems as a "game". The problem is these "street" systems are missing one key component, alive training with a resisting partner. Real opponents will resist you. If you're not training with resisting opponents you're not training realistically.

 

[ballen0351]

Do officers in Milwaukee not carry tazers (genuine question; I honestly have no idea but this would seem an ideal situation to use them if so)?

I have no idea. Doesn't matter you charge at an officer with a knife that is deadly force. You don't use a taser in a deal force situation. Tasers are not the end all be all. If you don't get good contact and good spread with both probes it doesn't do much but sting and won't stop anyone

 

[ballen0351]

You're using LEOs as an example of the "better tried by 12 than carried by 6" argument?

Yes

The op makes great points. There are too many cliches that are repeated without though or question. The mentioned quote is one example and an excuse some use to be ignorant of the law.

I disagree I'm not ignorant of the law. I understand the saying. I have no problem with it

"Survival at all costs" is another oversimplicaction. If you're aware of the law you can act accordingly. If you do kill a person you'll have to prove that it was your only option. The above mentioned quotes are setting your students up for trouble.

Setting then up for trouble how? I don't Hear the sayings and think "oh boy I get to kill someone now" I hear them and think. Do what you need to do to win

 

[Reeksta]

I have no idea. Doesn't matter you charge at an officer with a knife that is deadly force. You don't use a taser in a deal force situation. Tasers are not the end all be all. If you don't get good contact and good spread with both probes it doesn't do much but sting and won't stop anyone

Fair enough, I'm not in law enforcement and don't have experience of these things. In my defence I did point out in my OP that people who do particular jobs face situations that the rest of us probably won't and I would stand by the idea that "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" is very overused and an extreme oversimplification of most situations

 

[ballen0351]

Fair enough, I'm not in law enforcement and don't have experience of these things. In my defence I did point out in my OP that people who do particular jobs face situations that the rest of us probably won't and I would stand by the idea that "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" is very overused and an extreme oversimplification of most situations

Stand by it if you want I disagree and think it's sound advice.

 

[Reeksta]

Stand by it if you want I disagree and think it's sound advice.

Okay

 

[Mephisto]

Yes

I disagree I'm not ignorant of the law. I understand the saying. I have no problem with it

Setting then up for trouble how? I don't Hear the sayings and think "oh boy I get to kill someone now" I hear them and think. Do what you need to do to win

It's an oversimplicaction. Just because you know the law doesn't mean your student does. I train a blade art, one has to be especially careful there. Not everyone is wise, you tell a student to survive at all costs and they may end up using lethal force with their blade in a situation where it's not necessary. Like I said I come from a weapons art, you have to be careful teaching people it's okay to use deadly force. It may be different with empty hand where it's not as easy to end a life but I still believe "better tried by 12..." Is a bad cliche. It's welcoming the prospect of going to prison when you should always make sure it's never a possibility if you operate within the law.

 

[ballen0351]

It's an oversimplicaction. Just because you know the law doesn't mean your student does. I train a blade art, one has to be especially careful there. Not everyone is wise, you tell a student to survive at all costs and they may end up using lethal force with their blade in a situation where it's not necessary. Like I said I come from a weapons art, you have to be careful teaching people it's okay to use deadly force. It may be different with empty hand where it's not as easy to end a life but I still believe "better tried by 12..." Is a bad cliche. It's welcoming the prospect of going to prison when you should always make sure it's never a possibility if you operate within the law.

If you are not teaching your students what's is and isn't appropriate use of force then you shouldn't be teaching them

 

[Tez3]

Stand by it if you want I disagree and think it's sound advice.

It's certainly not the worst advice and certainly no one has come up with anything else that can convey in such a memorable way that you have to do what you must to survive an attack and which will come back to you at the vital moment you need it to!
it's a cliché certainly but the worst thing someone can overdo is falter because they are overthinking what they'd been told to do in such a situation. If you start the 'what if' thing while being attacked (what if I hit him and he falls hits his head and dies........what if I push him and he falls into the road and gets run over....etc etc etc) then you are doomed to be beaten up or worse so a little mantra that says better to be tried by 12 etc is not the worse thing you can think. Unless you are a seasoned 'street fighter' who fights nightly or weekly and have the instincts of Batman so that you need no prompting to defend yourself, it's a useful reminder. People really do freeze in an attack, even martial artists, I've seen it.

 

[Mephisto]

If you are not teaching your students what's is and isn't appropriate use of force then you shouldn't be teaching them

I do, that's why I think the quote in mention is ignorant. You don't want to end up in a courtroom, if you operate lawfully you'll have less to worry about.

 

[ballen0351]

I do, that's why I think the quote in mention is ignorant. You don't want to end up in a courtroom, if you operate lawfully you'll have less to worry about.

Nothing ignorant about it. It's truth. Doing what you believe is lawful does not mean you won't end up in court.

 

[Reeksta]

I've mentioned here before the "individual is more important than style" is a quote that's often repeated as a fact and I'd say just the opposite os true or at least it's up for debate.

My stance is that real encounters will involve an aggressive resisting opponent. Systems that train regularly with aggressive and resisting partners will best equip their students for reality. Sport systems are some of the best at giving students this type of training. Better yet a sport base with some self defense specific training. But systens that train dead patterns on compliant partners often espouse that they are training for reality and decry sport systems as a "game". The problem is these "street" systems are missing one key component, alive training with a resisting partner. Real opponents will resist you. If you're not training with resisting opponents you're not training realistically.

Haha this is a bit of a hornets' nest so I'll tread carefully. Broadly speaking though I do agree that it's an overused cliche. I'm of the opinion that most arts have value but when I see no-touch KO stuff and nonsense like that it's hard to believe that any amount of training in such garbage will help you defend yourself in any setting

 

[Tez3]

It's an oversimplicaction. Just because you know the law doesn't mean your student does. I train a blade art, one has to be especially careful there. Not everyone is wise, you tell a student to survive at all costs and they may end up using lethal force with their blade in a situation where it's not necessary. Like I said I come from a weapons art, you have to be careful teaching people it's okay to use deadly force. It may be different with empty hand where it's not as easy to end a life but I still believe "better tried by 12..." Is a bad cliche. It's welcoming the prospect of going to prison when you should always make sure it's never a possibility if you operate within the law.

However the phrase better to be judged etc doesn't mean 'survive at all costs' so much as don't treat this as you would a sparring session in the dojo, use the force you need to stop them which will be (here in the UK) reasonable force and therefore inside the law. You don't bluntly tell students 'survive at all costs' and then just leave it at that, you educate them not just in techniques but the law where you are. All martial artists teaching self defence should know the self defence laws where they are. It's acceptable here to knock someone out because that is reasonable force, kicking them in the head when they are out is not reasonable and therefore illegal, all students learning self defence should know things like that as pertains to them.