Background checks
- Thread starter JBAtlanta
- Start date
Takai
Senior Master
Define the wrong folks.
You mean... The people who could benefit most from learning some self discipline?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.
It's a good question. Generally I have not heard of it as being the norm. (background checks). Martial arts is about a lot of things and character is at the top of the list. As a rule, and at the right dojo, character is cultivated through hard work and dedication. Background checks can give us a glimpse of what a person is or has been, but in some cases I have heard of people experiencing a turn around for the better after starting training. The really bad ones never last because of the rules, discipline, and over all humility that comes from learning from the right Sensei. "I hope this helps".
That at makes sense.
I asked because of this: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iTxAjN1XSso
Obviously, there are no guarantees, but how do we make sure MA practitioners use good judgement? Is it enough to tell students or should there be more?
I am not exactly sure how one would go about performing a background check on students as a private citizen or independent group (not government or law enforcement etal). Students who would potentially misuse the art would be discovered fairly quickly by an observant instructor.
I guess that would depend upon whether the individual(s) in question have the desire to better themselves or just want to learn how to hurt people better.
Unless you're using a psychic for the background check, it's not going to provide this information, now is it?
I have had this debate with several people in the arts and I don't think it is really an issue. As several posters have pointed out, criminal or crazy types don't have the discipline or patience to spend years learning an art to hurt people when a knife, bat or gun are so easily available.
My FMA instructor said he doesn't like to teach knife technique to people who haven't been around very long because he doesn't want to teach them something that could be so dangerous. I countered that if you read the crime section of the newspaper, you can find people killing other people with knives all the time, and the killers aren't spending 4 hours a week in class learning how to do it...they get a knife from home and stab their victim to death, end of story, no training involved.
A freind of mine who teaches Silat said that he wouldn't teach the really dangerous techniques to just anyone because he felt he had to be careful in who had the knowledge. I pointed out that those really dangerous techniques take a long time to learn,usually, and that most people don't last more than a year anyway, and the techniques he was concerned about require dedicated practice to make work...which is not what most deranged people are willing to commit to in time and effort.
I also pointed out in these debates that the people who use violence in their professions, soldiers, criminals' police, don't spend most of their time learning unarmed combatives (if anyone learns more it would be police officers because they need to restrain people). the local drug gang doesn't spend it's time training it's members in unarmed combat, if they need someone killed, they give a gun to their 15 year old thug and have him shoot the victim. Navy Seals, Rangers and other elite military fighters may learn hand to hand combat techniques, but Their primary means of performing violence is their rifles and pistols...then a knife...and then their hands.
so, as others have pointed out! background checks are not really necessary.
My FMA instructor said he doesn't like to teach knife technique to people who haven't been around very long because he doesn't want to teach them something that could be so dangerous. I countered that if you read the crime section of the newspaper, you can find people killing other people with knives all the time, and the killers aren't spending 4 hours a week in class learning how to do it...they get a knife from home and stab their victim to death, end of story, no training involved.
A freind of mine who teaches Silat said that he wouldn't teach the really dangerous techniques to just anyone because he felt he had to be careful in who had the knowledge. I pointed out that those really dangerous techniques take a long time to learn,usually, and that most people don't last more than a year anyway, and the techniques he was concerned about require dedicated practice to make work...which is not what most deranged people are willing to commit to in time and effort.
I also pointed out in these debates that the people who use violence in their professions, soldiers, criminals' police, don't spend most of their time learning unarmed combatives (if anyone learns more it would be police officers because they need to restrain people). the local drug gang doesn't spend it's time training it's members in unarmed combat, if they need someone killed, they give a gun to their 15 year old thug and have him shoot the victim. Navy Seals, Rangers and other elite military fighters may learn hand to hand combat techniques, but Their primary means of performing violence is their rifles and pistols...then a knife...and then their hands.
so, as others have pointed out! background checks are not really necessary.
I trained in a gym that was in a very rough neighborhood. There were certainly guys with sketchy pasts. (Even not too distance pasts). Hard training weeds out the folks who aren't committed (as others said above). Background checks on students are not necessary. Look at it from a purely business standpoint. Are school owners going to do background checks on every white belt that begins class? The expense would not be worth any benefit you may receive.
No - but an instructor should be able to work it out once the student starts training. If they do the right thing then they will benefit, if they do the wrong thing then you can ask them to leave. As lomg as the instructor lets the students know, in no uncertain terms, that if they misuse the art they will no longer be part of it then background checks (with or without psychics) will be unnecessary.
I've never heard of schools running background checks on prospective students. Teachers, yes, but not students. It seems unnecessary (like others have said, you'll be able to figure out if they're a problem soon enough), and I think a lot of prospective students would be weirded out by it. I would - it seems instrusive.
Similar threads
