Steve
Mostly Harmless
I would call 911 and grab a baseball bat. What would you do?
How useful are the teaching methods of some arts???
- Thread starter thetruth
- Start date
Hyper_Shadow
Green Belt
Just grab the baseball bat or nihonto shinken or boomstick, noone other than you and the person breaking in knows they are there. They have entered your home and your family is at risk. Hell will make sapce for them.
To quote Geoff Thompson, 'Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6'.
To quote Geoff Thompson, 'Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6'.
bowser666
2nd Black Belt
- Joined
- May 20, 2008
- Messages
- 751
- Reaction score
- 26
Sadly if someone breaks into your home a good lawyer can turn things around and find you at fault if you injure or even kill the intruder. We have all seen it happen. The only way is if there is immediate threat to life or life of another, or there is no escape. Many lawyers and courts will actually suggest that you leave your own House to escape from the assailant rather than defend your home. Except in maybe Texas where I live. You can open fire just for someone knocking on your door at a late hour and not get in trouble 
( Just kidding , it was a joke )
( Just kidding , it was a joke )
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
This may have seemed like a arbitrary question, but, it reveals
the Heart of the practitioner, and demonstrates what makes
teaching extreme methods A dilemma .
You must remember that we live in a civil society, we can only use
Force if directly threatened and only in proportion to the threat.
We can not harm a individual due to property crimes,
For instance , if someone is in your garage stealing your
Lawn mower, and you go out there and club him with
A bat, you have perpetrated a crime, (if he dies
Involuntary manslaughter) .
He was no direct threat to you, you went to him, you
Ambushed or attacked him, You are responsible, because
You could have taken other less violent and confrontational
courses of action.
Like calling 911 and turning the light on from a safe location,
or triggering your Car alarm, perhaps getting a look at
the invader from a distance for ID purposes etc.
The same can be said of someone breaking into your car,
Do you confront them ? There are three question that you
Need to ask yourself, Am I ready to die ? Am I ready to kill ?
Is it worth it ? If you confront this desperate individual and
They are armed, you will find your self in a life and death
Struggle FOR ? some change, and a few CD .s , ok
The entire car , is it worth it ? Nope, because again
You will actually be liable, the car thief did not threaten you,
And did not attack you, you went to him , and initiated the
Violence, this is not defensive !
This is YOU trying to dispense your own Justice.
What about your home, as in the original question ?
If I am upstairs with my family and someone invades my home
Downstairs, I should not go down the stairs under any
Circumstances , Armed or not. I should call the police ,
And take a safe , defensive position which protects my
Family, in my home this would be the top of the stairs
Where a intruder would have to pass my door to
Get to my family. I call 911 and wait in this
Secure location, if the intruder comes to me, or
Is a potential treat to my family, I may now respond
With the necessary force, even lethal force, and yes
It is worth it, I am fighting for my life and my family,
Which is directly threatened,
When you take a bat and go down stairs to confront a
Intruder, you are actually violating martial principles,
You are the last line of defense in your home,
You are leaving a safe , secure position, and foraying into
The unknown , you do not know how many intruders there
Are , nor where they all are, if they are armed or not .
A base ball bat or gulf club etc is a bad tactical choice,
You can not swing a bat in a confined hallway,
Unless you have a gun, your confrontation is going
To be much closer and in person.
If you enter a room with a bat or knife or something
You picked up on the way in, to threaten a intruder,
You are likely to be shot dead , and even if the intruder
Is not armed, they are not likely to be real intimidated,
Especially if there is more then one of them,
And they are not going to care if you threaten them with
A blackbelt .
Why do we confront intruders in this manner, because of
EGO , and EMOTION, and a violated sense of justice.
The fact is we are not judge , jury and executioner, and
The LEAGAL SYSTEM takes a dim view of those who try
To dispense their own justice, you will in fact be prosecuted
An potentially punished for doing so.
We may believe that a intruder needs to be punished,
But it is not our job to capture criminals, (that is why you
Call 911 , and keep them on the phone) and it is not
Our job to judge people, they have the RIGHT to
a trial, and we are NOT the jury.
According to the LAWS of our society
NO ONE will ever be beaten or executed over property crimes,
This is not the appropriate response, and it is not self
Defense to dispense your own justice, especially not in
The form of violence.
What I have said is martial Arts training, and it has very
Little to do with actually fighting , or lethal methods.
The more we think we know , the more violent our
Potential, the more we tend to believe in dispensing
Our own justice, it is human nature to think this
Way, we have the equalizer so we are fearless,
In fact this is Egotistical, and Emotional , and manifests
As confrontational, and violent response,
A martial response, is survival, clear headed, not emotional
And exercises self control, it is not confrontational and only
Violent if absolutely necessary
This is why the impetuous or immature should not be
Taught some methods, it enables their violence ,
And makes them a menace or threat to their selves ,
As well as society in general. You might kill the 16 year
Old from down the street, who is just misdirected
And entered your home, does he deserve to die
Because he was stealing your dvd player, for some
Quick cash ? How would you feel about that for the
Rest of your life. I can tell you, standing over some
One that is dead or you think is dead, is not a experience you
Want to have, and certainly not when it is over
Something easily replicable, and would have caused
You no harm, to lose.
It is not martial to know how to fight , it is martial to know
When it is necessary, and to avoid fighting until there
Is no other alternative.
Romney^..^
the Heart of the practitioner, and demonstrates what makes
teaching extreme methods A dilemma .
You must remember that we live in a civil society, we can only use
Force if directly threatened and only in proportion to the threat.
We can not harm a individual due to property crimes,
For instance , if someone is in your garage stealing your
Lawn mower, and you go out there and club him with
A bat, you have perpetrated a crime, (if he dies
Involuntary manslaughter) .
He was no direct threat to you, you went to him, you
Ambushed or attacked him, You are responsible, because
You could have taken other less violent and confrontational
courses of action.
Like calling 911 and turning the light on from a safe location,
or triggering your Car alarm, perhaps getting a look at
the invader from a distance for ID purposes etc.
The same can be said of someone breaking into your car,
Do you confront them ? There are three question that you
Need to ask yourself, Am I ready to die ? Am I ready to kill ?
Is it worth it ? If you confront this desperate individual and
They are armed, you will find your self in a life and death
Struggle FOR ? some change, and a few CD .s , ok
The entire car , is it worth it ? Nope, because again
You will actually be liable, the car thief did not threaten you,
And did not attack you, you went to him , and initiated the
Violence, this is not defensive !
This is YOU trying to dispense your own Justice.
What about your home, as in the original question ?
If I am upstairs with my family and someone invades my home
Downstairs, I should not go down the stairs under any
Circumstances , Armed or not. I should call the police ,
And take a safe , defensive position which protects my
Family, in my home this would be the top of the stairs
Where a intruder would have to pass my door to
Get to my family. I call 911 and wait in this
Secure location, if the intruder comes to me, or
Is a potential treat to my family, I may now respond
With the necessary force, even lethal force, and yes
It is worth it, I am fighting for my life and my family,
Which is directly threatened,
When you take a bat and go down stairs to confront a
Intruder, you are actually violating martial principles,
You are the last line of defense in your home,
You are leaving a safe , secure position, and foraying into
The unknown , you do not know how many intruders there
Are , nor where they all are, if they are armed or not .
A base ball bat or gulf club etc is a bad tactical choice,
You can not swing a bat in a confined hallway,
Unless you have a gun, your confrontation is going
To be much closer and in person.
If you enter a room with a bat or knife or something
You picked up on the way in, to threaten a intruder,
You are likely to be shot dead , and even if the intruder
Is not armed, they are not likely to be real intimidated,
Especially if there is more then one of them,
And they are not going to care if you threaten them with
A blackbelt .
Why do we confront intruders in this manner, because of
EGO , and EMOTION, and a violated sense of justice.
The fact is we are not judge , jury and executioner, and
The LEAGAL SYSTEM takes a dim view of those who try
To dispense their own justice, you will in fact be prosecuted
An potentially punished for doing so.
We may believe that a intruder needs to be punished,
But it is not our job to capture criminals, (that is why you
Call 911 , and keep them on the phone) and it is not
Our job to judge people, they have the RIGHT to
a trial, and we are NOT the jury.
According to the LAWS of our society
NO ONE will ever be beaten or executed over property crimes,
This is not the appropriate response, and it is not self
Defense to dispense your own justice, especially not in
The form of violence.
What I have said is martial Arts training, and it has very
Little to do with actually fighting , or lethal methods.
The more we think we know , the more violent our
Potential, the more we tend to believe in dispensing
Our own justice, it is human nature to think this
Way, we have the equalizer so we are fearless,
In fact this is Egotistical, and Emotional , and manifests
As confrontational, and violent response,
A martial response, is survival, clear headed, not emotional
And exercises self control, it is not confrontational and only
Violent if absolutely necessary
This is why the impetuous or immature should not be
Taught some methods, it enables their violence ,
And makes them a menace or threat to their selves ,
As well as society in general. You might kill the 16 year
Old from down the street, who is just misdirected
And entered your home, does he deserve to die
Because he was stealing your dvd player, for some
Quick cash ? How would you feel about that for the
Rest of your life. I can tell you, standing over some
One that is dead or you think is dead, is not a experience you
Want to have, and certainly not when it is over
Something easily replicable, and would have caused
You no harm, to lose.
It is not martial to know how to fight , it is martial to know
When it is necessary, and to avoid fighting until there
Is no other alternative.
Romney^..^
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,058
I don't think so, I think that most teachers still have a code of ethics that they live by. I think you don't show certain things because you don't know if the student will have the same morality and responsibility to use them at the appropriate time. Also, put another way, if all you teach are the "deadly techniques" or techniques that will do lots of damage such as throat strikes, eye rakes, etc. What response is a beginning student going to have? All he has are the high injury tools to use even when the response doesn't call for that.
Also, I think that some things in forms and katas have no "combat meaning" and were symbolic. Many chinese forms included training movements in there to develop and attribute, but it isn't something that has a direct combat application. Also, there are moves in okinawan karate that have the same thing. If you look at Kusanku (isshin-ryu version) there is a move at the very beginning that you make a circle with both arms. I have heard that the move is meant to open the curtain doorway of a house before attack someone. Huh? Someone else said that it is a symbolic symbol showing the moon and is a reference to something else. Can you make a move up to find a combat application? Sure, you can but is that what it was originally meant for?
It reminds me "The Little Mermaid", where the seagull shows her a fork and calls it something completely different and says it's for using on your hair. Could it be used for that? It could, but that is not what it was meant for.
Cirdan
Senior Master
With a burglar in the house I guess I would use Ninja Power of Invisibility, Teleport next to him, distract him using Ninja Mind Control and execute the Five Step Exploding Hart Technique
Or I could hit him over the head with a steel pipe.. an equally "deadly technique"
More myths.. everyboy can deliver a deadly strike to say the throat of another person. A skilled martial artist can do so more cleanly because he or she has perfected the bacics, not because of some obscure secret move.
Out, Out I say you demons of stupidity and mysticism!
Or I could hit him over the head with a steel pipe.. an equally "deadly technique"
More myths.. everyboy can deliver a deadly strike to say the throat of another person. A skilled martial artist can do so more cleanly because he or she has perfected the bacics, not because of some obscure secret move.
Out, Out I say you demons of stupidity and mysticism!
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
It has been stated that there are no secrets in martial arts, and that
Everything is in plain sight. In the end it is the mind and spirit that
Is being forged.
The intent which we train with, greatly influences our techniques,
Like all Human endeavor, the most powerful must be tempered
With love and compassion , or they become oppressive ,
And self serving.
Train the way you want, if there is nothing hidden you are not
missing anything so don’t be concerned, be confident and secure
in what you already know and practice, and don’t worry about
what others are learning.
If you are not so confident and secure, begin working on
You character, and human understanding, then approach
Your teacher, you may find that there is much more
To the training then meets the eye.
Romney^..^
Everything is in plain sight. In the end it is the mind and spirit that
Is being forged.
The intent which we train with, greatly influences our techniques,
Like all Human endeavor, the most powerful must be tempered
With love and compassion , or they become oppressive ,
And self serving.
Train the way you want, if there is nothing hidden you are not
missing anything so don’t be concerned, be confident and secure
in what you already know and practice, and don’t worry about
what others are learning.
If you are not so confident and secure, begin working on
You character, and human understanding, then approach
Your teacher, you may find that there is much more
To the training then meets the eye.
Romney^..^
shihansmurf
Black Belt
I guess things are different back east. I live in Arizona. I grew up in Wyoming, and in both of those states I would be legally justified in killing an intruder in my home, as well I should be. See, there is a core difference of opinion on this matter. I believe that it is not only my right but my obligation to protect home, family, and property from the actions of criminals.This is in no way uncivilized.I will not lay down my rights to protect the rights of a criminal.I find the concept repulsive, and antithetical to any sort free society.
I would confront a criminal breaking into my car, home, gym locker, or mail box. I would use whatever degree of force the situation initialy called for and would comfortably escalate in response to any level needed.This is what fighting skills are for.Fighting.
We confront intruders in this manner because it is effective and the correct course of action.As a husband and father is is my duty to protect my family. As a citizen it is my obligation to protect my person and my property. As a soldier it is my charge to protect our nation and its constitution. Would you rather that I be remiss in my duties so that I could protect those that do not respect the rights of the victims that they endanger? Should we sacrifice the innocent to protect the evil? The question isn't rhetorical, I am interested in your response.
Code:
What I have said is martial Arts training, and it has very
Little to do with actually fighting , or lethal methods.Fortune cookie wisdom aside, I would be interested in the content of the training sessions the you engage in. I am always intrigued when I encounter those that feel that martial art training has little to do with violence.I have been training for 24 years. During that time the vast majority of my training had been focused on directly fighting or the skills and attributes associated with fighting. Punching, kicking, throwing, weapons training, weapon disarms, and the like. I'm curious as to what I've been missing. I note the capitol A in the word Arts in your response. Do you study an "advanced" form of MA that is somehow vastly superior to the physical arts that the overwhelming majority of us practice?
See, martial art training is about learning to fight. We might not like to accept this but the truth of the matter is that as martial artists we have an interest in, propensity for, and predisposition to engage in acts of violence. If this were not so we would be involved in another sport or pastime. We are training in fighting arts because we like to fight, in whatever capacity we are capable of. This whole Karate Kid mantra of "I train to fight so I don't have to fight", is self-delusional crap that distorts and obfuscates the nature of what we do. We train to fight so we will be good at fighting. That's what we are practicing when we are engaged in martial arts training.Fighting. This is training to fight. When I am cooking dinner I am not training to fight, I'm cooking.Different activities, different outcomes. We get better at what we practice.If we practice fighting we get better at fighting, if we practice not fighting (say, for example by not training in fighting) then we get better at not fighting.
I realize that I'm coming off a bit harsh and combative in this post and if I have given offense, I extend apologies. This is a bit of a hot button topic with me as it took me along time to come to the understanding that there is a time and place for violence, and when that occasion arrives then it is cowardice and moral bankruptcy not to act.
While I don't disagree with your statement as a general principle, I would point out that,myself included, there are a number of military members that frequent these boards as well as law enforcement officers. Several of us have been involved in violent encounters wherein either people we cared about died or we took the life of another person. Some of us have had those experiences and still believe that sometimes force is necessary, irrespective of the emotional consequences. In point of fact, it is a concept called sacrifice.While I'll not presume to speak for others on this board I would state that the implication that defending those things that we a re responsible for is not worth that is more than a little insulting.
Feel free to disagree,
Mark
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
Greetings – I had intended to end my comments as the argument is pointless,
But, since you were so kind as to respond, it seems courteous to respond to your
Questions, I’ll do my best to avoid you violent rhetoric , I hope you live long enough
To realize the true value of a human life, both yours and those of others.
I never suggested that we should not protect the helpless , The victimized,
Or our friends , family or ourselves from acts of violence , this would be a
Righteous action, of self defense (sometimes extended to the helpless etc,
Which I have done).
However, Unless we are in law enforcement, Or the military,
Where we have been given the authority by the government which
We serve to legally intervene in non-violent crimes like property crimes,
And theft etc, that we must abide carefully by the rule of Moral
Culture, and the culture in which we live, and allow those entrusted
With this authority to do their duty. There are many things which
are not violent which we can do to help apprehend a thief for instance.
We do not need to confront them, more often then not we can
either stop the crime or aid in their apprehension without violence.
When we needlessly play vigilantly and use Violent confrontation as our
FIRST rather than LAST resort , we needlessly expose ourselves and others
To violence , and only make the job of the real authorities harder.
I ‘m sure your wife and children would prefer having daddy around,
Even if they were to lose a dvd player, as you could replace the dvd
Player tomorrow . It is not worth the cost of a life.
Confrontation and Violence is not a end it is a beginning, and if you want to
Go around a urban neighborhood as a guardian of the streets,
I suggest that you invest in some very good insurance, with a nice
Death benefit for your children. WHATS that, you are not going
Around doing this , why not ? , where do you draw the line,
These are innocent and helpless people being victimized,
And defending them is often romanticized in Batman and
Sprider man, deathwish etc, Where do you draw the line ? and do you
Really believe if you leave a trail of bodies that law enforcement
Would thank you, and a judge would exonerate you ?
You ask
Should we sacrifice the innocent to protect the evil?
No again you are mixing crime against people where intervention
Is righteous with protection of property, and other non-violent types of
Crime, which will only BECOME violent if we intervene.
My dvd player is neither innocent or deserving of violence it is just a
Inanimate object which is easily replaced.
It has little to do with good and evil, Evil is however very much
Connected to violence and its indiscriminate use.
Regarding fighting, and liking to fight etc, this is a illness of the mind,
Harming and even killing others may sometimes be necessary but
Enjoying it , is a sickness which leads to death.
The best adage I know, was told to me by a x-military man,
Who was alienated by society post Vietnam , he ran with
The local bike gangs, and his best friend did 23 year for
Killing someone in a streetfight, he said
“I don’t want to be the baddest guy around , I want to be
the one the baddest leave alone”
Sensei lives a peaceful life.
When you go around fighting and hurting people you end up feared,
Hated, and sometimes hunted , I had a best friend killed because he
Liked to fight, and because of his reputation he was shot dead
When some local bad *** , thought he was going to get his
A__ kick, so he shot him dead instead of enduring a confrontation
With him.
Trust me , I know from experience, if you do not have the support
Of the government as a police officer or solder , using
Violence, and fighting for the joy of it , is going to lead you
To suffer , and what you suffer will also affect those you love.
You can take this advice or not, but I hope you do ,
And if you don’t, remember these words ,
You may wish you had listened, as I wish I had.
Life is precious my Friend, do all you can to preserve it,
Taking life from someone or harming others is nothing
To aspire to, and time spent dreaming about harming others ,
as you Train to fight, is squandered time. It is more
helpful to prepare your own self to meet death.
Romney^..^
But, since you were so kind as to respond, it seems courteous to respond to your
Questions, I’ll do my best to avoid you violent rhetoric , I hope you live long enough
To realize the true value of a human life, both yours and those of others.
I never suggested that we should not protect the helpless , The victimized,
Or our friends , family or ourselves from acts of violence , this would be a
Righteous action, of self defense (sometimes extended to the helpless etc,
Which I have done).
However, Unless we are in law enforcement, Or the military,
Where we have been given the authority by the government which
We serve to legally intervene in non-violent crimes like property crimes,
And theft etc, that we must abide carefully by the rule of Moral
Culture, and the culture in which we live, and allow those entrusted
With this authority to do their duty. There are many things which
are not violent which we can do to help apprehend a thief for instance.
We do not need to confront them, more often then not we can
either stop the crime or aid in their apprehension without violence.
When we needlessly play vigilantly and use Violent confrontation as our
FIRST rather than LAST resort , we needlessly expose ourselves and others
To violence , and only make the job of the real authorities harder.
I ‘m sure your wife and children would prefer having daddy around,
Even if they were to lose a dvd player, as you could replace the dvd
Player tomorrow . It is not worth the cost of a life.
Confrontation and Violence is not a end it is a beginning, and if you want to
Go around a urban neighborhood as a guardian of the streets,
I suggest that you invest in some very good insurance, with a nice
Death benefit for your children. WHATS that, you are not going
Around doing this , why not ? , where do you draw the line,
These are innocent and helpless people being victimized,
And defending them is often romanticized in Batman and
Sprider man, deathwish etc, Where do you draw the line ? and do you
Really believe if you leave a trail of bodies that law enforcement
Would thank you, and a judge would exonerate you ?
You ask
Should we sacrifice the innocent to protect the evil?
No again you are mixing crime against people where intervention
Is righteous with protection of property, and other non-violent types of
Crime, which will only BECOME violent if we intervene.
My dvd player is neither innocent or deserving of violence it is just a
Inanimate object which is easily replaced.
It has little to do with good and evil, Evil is however very much
Connected to violence and its indiscriminate use.
Regarding fighting, and liking to fight etc, this is a illness of the mind,
Harming and even killing others may sometimes be necessary but
Enjoying it , is a sickness which leads to death.
The best adage I know, was told to me by a x-military man,
Who was alienated by society post Vietnam , he ran with
The local bike gangs, and his best friend did 23 year for
Killing someone in a streetfight, he said
“I don’t want to be the baddest guy around , I want to be
the one the baddest leave alone”
Sensei lives a peaceful life.
When you go around fighting and hurting people you end up feared,
Hated, and sometimes hunted , I had a best friend killed because he
Liked to fight, and because of his reputation he was shot dead
When some local bad *** , thought he was going to get his
A__ kick, so he shot him dead instead of enduring a confrontation
With him.
Trust me , I know from experience, if you do not have the support
Of the government as a police officer or solder , using
Violence, and fighting for the joy of it , is going to lead you
To suffer , and what you suffer will also affect those you love.
You can take this advice or not, but I hope you do ,
And if you don’t, remember these words ,
You may wish you had listened, as I wish I had.
Life is precious my Friend, do all you can to preserve it,
Taking life from someone or harming others is nothing
To aspire to, and time spent dreaming about harming others ,
as you Train to fight, is squandered time. It is more
helpful to prepare your own self to meet death.
Romney^..^
shihansmurf
Black Belt
I have a feeling that I could be feeding a troll, but I'll respond to this as a courtesy, and if I am wrong on the troll part I apologize.
Underlying our discussion is a core difference of opinion of the role of "authority" figures versus the individual in relation to the protection of property and self.You and I disagree. Its that simple.I didn't use violent rhetoric and I can frankly do without hollow platitudes on the value of human life. It isn't that I don't understand your position, am ignorant of the emotional dimension inherent in your argument, or dismissive of your right to hold or express your view. I just don't agree. I think that you and can discuss this issue without being condescending each other. To that end, if anything I wrote in either of these posts offended you on a personal level I extend apologies as that was not my intent.Please note, however, I have been in violent situations that resulted in loss of life. I am intimately familiar with the repercussions of fatal violence.So, please spare my any melodramatic commentary on the nature of such and frame your argument logically instead of emotively, as a courtesy.
We, as the body politic, are not given authority by the government.We, as the governed, grant authority to the government. This is a basic principle of our system of government.
In my home state it is fully legal to kill a trespasser. I only need to have posted signs on my property and am free to shoot a person that enters my fence line without my permission. As a matter of fact, if I owned a horse I could kill a person for attempting to steal said horse with impunity.Do you consider this to be a moral right. My state does, which would qualify as an exercise of the "authority" granted me by the state to protect my property.This would seem to conflict with the standard of government approval for ethical correctness that you are espousing. What are your feelings in regard to localities that allow for the use of deadly force in the protection of personal property?
Confusing this matter is the fact that I am a member of the Armed Forces serving on active duty. You have stated that private citizens should defer to the military and to law enforcement establishment for their protection.
Do you agree that the military, under the specific conditions that must be extant to suspend Posse Commitatus, has the right to use deadly force to protect the personal property of the citizenry? Should soldier's have killed looters in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, for example? What are your thoughts?
We covered this at length in a different thread. I have not advocating that we, as martial artists, have an obligation to pretend to be Batman. I am stating that we have a right to defend ourselves and our property against harm or theft using force. I personally don't have a line that I have drawn as each specific incident or scenario would contain different variables. I concur with you in that our first response shouldn't be deadly force, where we diverge in our view is that I consider deadly force to be an option should the situation escalate to that level. I also disagree that it is my responsibility as the hypothetical crime victim to protect the safety of the criminal at the expense of my well-being or my property.
I, as a younger man, was a competitive boxer. Earned a couple of cool amateur belts that I have in my office. I enjoyed the physical altercations in the ring. I liked hitting the other fighter, and I enjoyed the thrill of beating that other man. Is this an illness of the mind? What about other combat sports players?
I noticed in your profile that you study okinawan karate. Choki Motobu was renowned as a fighter.He did so for entertainment. Mas Oyama killed bulls for sport.Was this an illness of the mind?
Anyone that trains in the martial arts for an extended time, rather consciously or not, enjoys the fighting aspect of the art. We spar, do kata (which are nothing more than catalouges of fighting techniques), practice weapon forms (what use is a weapon except as a killing tool?), and toughen our bodies to what end? Proficiency in violence.When you practice, do you visualize an opponent when you perform punches and kicks to the air or heavy bag? If so is this note, "dreaming about harming others as you train to fight"?
I am of the opinion that being morally comfortable with violence is not the same thing as wishing for it. You may not see it that way.
While I appreciate the fact that you think you are attempting to help me in some way I believe that I have covered this in my opening remarks in this post. I understand the severity of taking life. I have killed men in combat. I have had problems with the aftereffects for quite a long time. I am, however, willing to do so again in defense of my self, family,country,others, or property. You and I differ in our viewpoints on this matter, that is all. Please don't presume that because I don't see things in the same way as you that my opinion is uninformed.
All of the above is just my view on things and please note that while I do not agree with your opinion, I respect your right to hold it and am enjoying our discourse.
Mark
P.S. We seem to be drifting very far off topic and I would suggest that we either start a new thread or continue this in private message so as to not interfere with this thread.
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
Greetings – What I said was from the heart,
I apologize if it sounded condescending,
Regardless what you have done or why,
If you still believe that property or the inanimate
Is worth harming others or a life, then there is
Really nothing else to be said,
Except , This is why many methods
Are not taught publicly by responsible
Teachers, what you view as justifiable ,
Others see as abhorrent , and the major
Problem with our society.
This was the topic, and you have
Provided the best answer possible,
Lets let others decide for theirs selves,
The two sides are well outlined.
A few quotes from the movie Sanjuro
If you have the time you should watch it.
Mutsuta's wife
"Your too sharp. That's your trouble.
Your like a drawn sword. Sharp, naked without a sheath.
You cut well. But good swords are kept in their sheathes."
Mutsuta's wife
"Killing people is a bad habit."
Romney^..^
I apologize if it sounded condescending,
Regardless what you have done or why,
If you still believe that property or the inanimate
Is worth harming others or a life, then there is
Really nothing else to be said,
Except , This is why many methods
Are not taught publicly by responsible
Teachers, what you view as justifiable ,
Others see as abhorrent , and the major
Problem with our society.
This was the topic, and you have
Provided the best answer possible,
Lets let others decide for theirs selves,
The two sides are well outlined.
A few quotes from the movie Sanjuro
If you have the time you should watch it.
Mutsuta's wife
"Your too sharp. That's your trouble.
Your like a drawn sword. Sharp, naked without a sheath.
You cut well. But good swords are kept in their sheathes."
Mutsuta's wife
"Killing people is a bad habit."
Romney^..^
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
Perhaps we should start another thread on this,
These are good questions.
"Anyone that trains in the martial arts for an extended time, rather consciously or not, enjoys the fighting aspect of the art. We spar, do kata (which are nothing more than catalouges of fighting techniques), practice weapon forms (what use is a weapon except as a killing tool?), and toughen our bodies to what end? Proficiency in violence.When you practice, do you visualize an opponent when you perform punches and kicks to the air or heavy bag? If so is this note, "dreaming about harming others as you train to fight"?"
I should clarify that dreaming in this context is
Romanizing about it, adding personal (ego) value to
A necessary act,
Violence does not make us greater , it makes us less,
It is a sacrifice of self that some are willing to make,
This is not the same as wishing for it , or dreaming
Of scenarios where you can be justified in using it.
Drawing satisfaction from it or And enjoying it as
you do it.
Do you train to win, or train to survive,
Do you imagine that you are a hero saving your
Dvd player from the ravages of a thief, or that
You are directly being assaulted , and have no
Other recourse then to respond as necessary,
These are very different minds.
In kumite what is your intent ?, are you trying to
Become better and improve your skills and those of
Your opponent or are you intending to do them
Damage, so that you can some how feel, that
You have won and are therefore better than
them .
It is not how we train that it always important it
Is our intent while we train, and how we
Derive value from this training .
If I can train hard and help other to become
Strong, faster and more adept at what they do
Then I have done something positive that helps
Others as well as myself, If I have beaten someone up and
Humiliated them for personal gratification,
Then this is a pathetic use of training methods
Which is entirely self serving.
Romney^..^
These are good questions.
"Anyone that trains in the martial arts for an extended time, rather consciously or not, enjoys the fighting aspect of the art. We spar, do kata (which are nothing more than catalouges of fighting techniques), practice weapon forms (what use is a weapon except as a killing tool?), and toughen our bodies to what end? Proficiency in violence.When you practice, do you visualize an opponent when you perform punches and kicks to the air or heavy bag? If so is this note, "dreaming about harming others as you train to fight"?"
I should clarify that dreaming in this context is
Romanizing about it, adding personal (ego) value to
A necessary act,
Violence does not make us greater , it makes us less,
It is a sacrifice of self that some are willing to make,
This is not the same as wishing for it , or dreaming
Of scenarios where you can be justified in using it.
Drawing satisfaction from it or And enjoying it as
you do it.
Do you train to win, or train to survive,
Do you imagine that you are a hero saving your
Dvd player from the ravages of a thief, or that
You are directly being assaulted , and have no
Other recourse then to respond as necessary,
These are very different minds.
In kumite what is your intent ?, are you trying to
Become better and improve your skills and those of
Your opponent or are you intending to do them
Damage, so that you can some how feel, that
You have won and are therefore better than
them .
It is not how we train that it always important it
Is our intent while we train, and how we
Derive value from this training .
If I can train hard and help other to become
Strong, faster and more adept at what they do
Then I have done something positive that helps
Others as well as myself, If I have beaten someone up and
Humiliated them for personal gratification,
Then this is a pathetic use of training methods
Which is entirely self serving.
Romney^..^
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
you asked:
"In my home state it is fully legal to kill a trespasser. I only need to have posted signs on my property and am free to shoot a person that enters my fence line without my permission. As a matter of fact, if I owned a horse I could kill a person for attempting to steal said horse with impunity.Do you consider this to be a moral right. My state does, which would qualify as an exercise of the "authority" granted me by the state to protect my property.This would seem to conflict with the standard of government approval for ethical correctness that you are espousing. What are your feelings in regard to localities that allow for the use of deadly force in the protection of personal property?"
Well it is not very comforting to know that if I were to come to visit you that I
Could be shot dead for no reason other then , I forgot to mention I was coming. this seems just a little extreme to me, Yes.
Regarding the horse and the fence line, I think you are hiding behind a out dated Law to justify something which is no longer justifiable,
Historically Stealing someones horse , could be a death sentence for the person Losing the horse, it did directly threaten their well being and chance of survival under very extreme conditions, it hardly applies in modern society.
The same can be said of the trespassing a fence line, there were harsh realities that at one time made this necessary , and there was little if any local law enforcement on the range. This no longer applies, and Imo stealing my pet is not quite The same as leaving me to die , the same justification can no longer be Responsibly used.
Especially in modern times of adequate law enforcement,
Replicable property etc, where society in general insures
That no one is going to die because some one stole a horse,
I would say that property crimes should not be punishable by
Death, especially not summary execution , without Trail
, judge and jury (which are federal rights). Certainly
The legal system would not prosecute this case as a death
Penalty case, if I trespassed on your ranch accidentally
and you caught Me instead of shooting me dead.
Seems like a gap in the Law that allows for unwarranted violence to me.
So my position is, that if stealing said property does not
Directly affect my survival, or the survival of others,
Then NO, I have no moral or legally justifiable right
To kill someone over said property.
Romney ^..^
"In my home state it is fully legal to kill a trespasser. I only need to have posted signs on my property and am free to shoot a person that enters my fence line without my permission. As a matter of fact, if I owned a horse I could kill a person for attempting to steal said horse with impunity.Do you consider this to be a moral right. My state does, which would qualify as an exercise of the "authority" granted me by the state to protect my property.This would seem to conflict with the standard of government approval for ethical correctness that you are espousing. What are your feelings in regard to localities that allow for the use of deadly force in the protection of personal property?"
Well it is not very comforting to know that if I were to come to visit you that I
Could be shot dead for no reason other then , I forgot to mention I was coming. this seems just a little extreme to me, Yes.
Regarding the horse and the fence line, I think you are hiding behind a out dated Law to justify something which is no longer justifiable,
Historically Stealing someones horse , could be a death sentence for the person Losing the horse, it did directly threaten their well being and chance of survival under very extreme conditions, it hardly applies in modern society.
The same can be said of the trespassing a fence line, there were harsh realities that at one time made this necessary , and there was little if any local law enforcement on the range. This no longer applies, and Imo stealing my pet is not quite The same as leaving me to die , the same justification can no longer be Responsibly used.
Especially in modern times of adequate law enforcement,
Replicable property etc, where society in general insures
That no one is going to die because some one stole a horse,
I would say that property crimes should not be punishable by
Death, especially not summary execution , without Trail
, judge and jury (which are federal rights). Certainly
The legal system would not prosecute this case as a death
Penalty case, if I trespassed on your ranch accidentally
and you caught Me instead of shooting me dead.
Seems like a gap in the Law that allows for unwarranted violence to me.
So my position is, that if stealing said property does not
Directly affect my survival, or the survival of others,
Then NO, I have no moral or legally justifiable right
To kill someone over said property.
Romney ^..^
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
"Do you agree that the military, under the specific conditions that must be extant to suspend Posse Commitatus, has the right to use deadly force to protect the personal property of the citizenry? Should soldier's have killed looters in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, for example? What are your thoughts?"
There are circumstances where use of Violence is necessary,
and I do trust the judgment Of those in command of legal forces to exercise their judgment and protect the interests (personal and national ) of the citizens from other nations and organized Threats, or even lawlessness, and chaos.
No soldiers should not have killed people for looting.
I do believe the penalty for looting should be more severe,
than it is, but ,this is a civil legal matter where death is too extreme
a consequence, Unless of course the looters are armed and a clear danger,
under this circumstance, personal safety takes prescience.
Romney^..^
There are circumstances where use of Violence is necessary,
and I do trust the judgment Of those in command of legal forces to exercise their judgment and protect the interests (personal and national ) of the citizens from other nations and organized Threats, or even lawlessness, and chaos.
No soldiers should not have killed people for looting.
I do believe the penalty for looting should be more severe,
than it is, but ,this is a civil legal matter where death is too extreme
a consequence, Unless of course the looters are armed and a clear danger,
under this circumstance, personal safety takes prescience.
Romney^..^
Brian S
Purple Belt
Glad I don't live in your world wolfeyes.
Martial arts is for fighting if ned be, we just disagree on when we need to fight.
If someone breaks into my home they will be carried out if it's up to me. Their fault,not mine.
Martial arts is for fighting if ned be, we just disagree on when we need to fight.
If someone breaks into my home they will be carried out if it's up to me. Their fault,not mine.
7starmarc
Green Belt
This is a highly debatable statement. There are far too many instances in recent past that have displayed that law enforcement is, in fact, quite inadequate. There is also case law (in the US) that specifically states that LEOs are not obligated to take on the protection of persons or property, i.e their responsibility is to facilitate the prosecution of those who break the law.
Now, this is not to comment on the other aspects of use of force for protection of property. I actually agree that in most cases, property damage/theft does not merit use of deadly force, unless it is a case of armed robbery or assault in conjunction with the theft. This does not, however, apply to those situations where the loss of property would likely impact a person's ability to survive.
That being said, if someone forces their way into my home, I am not going to wait to find out exactly what they intend to do. I will assume the worst, and prepare to defend myself and my family to the best of my ability.
wolfeyes2323
Green Belt
"Glad I don't live in your world wolfeyes.
Martial arts is for fighting if ned be, we just disagree on when we need to fight.
If someone breaks into my home they will be carried out if it's up to me. Their fault,not mine."
I think this is directly related to what is taught and why,
If you feel this way, you are most likely to take a weapon of
Some kind and go from a safe secure location to confront
A intruder. This is in fact your worse tactical decision,
Instead , take a safe strategic location and wait,
If they come to you, everything, is in your favor
Including the law,
Or you can give up this tactical advantage and
Go hunting for the intruder to exact some kind
Of justice or retribution.
What is the difference, One is the most rational and
The other emotional, One is about survival and
The other ego and retribution.
I’m sorry , we do live in the same reality,
And while I can empathize with your opinion,
I would never teach someone to do this ,
As it is much more likely to get them killed.
To survive this reality you need to be smarter
Or one step ahead of the opponent,
If you freely give your advantages away,
This is neither martial thinking , nor, intelligent.
This very attitude can be used against you,
You will be easily manipulated into
Leaving safety and advantage,
This is the recipe for defeat, and
a basic (timeless) martial strategy ,
And once you are gone,
Your family will be alone with the intruder.
I think this a very poor choice.
personally, as stated before, to get to my
family from down stairs you would have to pass
my bedroom door, Now I would agree,
no one is passing this point , not while I breath.
Now I have no choice, there is no decision to be made ,
it was made for me, it is no longer about the inanimate
it is about those I love, entirely different.
There is a Okinawan saying,
“before using karate dig two graves”
I hope for your sake only one is needed.
Romney^..^
Martial arts is for fighting if ned be, we just disagree on when we need to fight.
If someone breaks into my home they will be carried out if it's up to me. Their fault,not mine."
I think this is directly related to what is taught and why,
If you feel this way, you are most likely to take a weapon of
Some kind and go from a safe secure location to confront
A intruder. This is in fact your worse tactical decision,
Instead , take a safe strategic location and wait,
If they come to you, everything, is in your favor
Including the law,
Or you can give up this tactical advantage and
Go hunting for the intruder to exact some kind
Of justice or retribution.
What is the difference, One is the most rational and
The other emotional, One is about survival and
The other ego and retribution.
I’m sorry , we do live in the same reality,
And while I can empathize with your opinion,
I would never teach someone to do this ,
As it is much more likely to get them killed.
To survive this reality you need to be smarter
Or one step ahead of the opponent,
If you freely give your advantages away,
This is neither martial thinking , nor, intelligent.
This very attitude can be used against you,
You will be easily manipulated into
Leaving safety and advantage,
This is the recipe for defeat, and
a basic (timeless) martial strategy ,
And once you are gone,
Your family will be alone with the intruder.
I think this a very poor choice.
personally, as stated before, to get to my
family from down stairs you would have to pass
my bedroom door, Now I would agree,
no one is passing this point , not while I breath.
Now I have no choice, there is no decision to be made ,
it was made for me, it is no longer about the inanimate
it is about those I love, entirely different.
There is a Okinawan saying,
“before using karate dig two graves”
I hope for your sake only one is needed.
Romney^..^
Brian S
Purple Belt
I don't teach these things, I teach karate.
It's not about making someone "pay" for what they do or justice. It's about my right to protect my property and my loved ones. It's not irrational or emotional,it's just the right thing to do.
Thanks for the polite stab,lol.
I suppose you think it would be better to stay away from confrontation with an intruder and just hope his intentions are good and he stays away from my kids room? Don't think so. Am I to assume that an intruder only wants monetary things and is not willing to go too far to get them?
That's illogical and a little obtuse. How is my position a safe and advantageous one? Are my kids safe all alone in their bedrooms? If they come in my bedroom do I just lie motionless under the covers? I'm not following your line of thinking.
I live in a one story house. The intruder could get to my kids bedroom before I know it. If someone comes into my house uninvited I will startegically investigate,gun in hand.
I don't live in okinawa, I live in Arkansas. i'm not interested in everything mystical about okinawa or their sayings. I do realize that with the practice of karate some people get confused about who they truly are or where they are in time.
shihansmurf
Black Belt
Well said.
I had forgotten about this discussion, and I'll take bowser666's point and extract myself from this for a few reasons.
1 I don't believe that wolfeyes and I are going to come to an agreement on this, and there is that point that a discussion becomes futile debate. We have reached it.
2 We have sidetracked this thread long enough.
3 I think you've hit the nail so squarely on the head that I don't have anymore to add except that the part of your post that I quoted speaks well to the heart of this discussion.
Thanks
Mark
