Techniques you learn in your MA that are probably not a good idea for Self Defense

[Petey Nunchakus]

Ive never taken Aikido, but I wouldn't be too confident in having to defend myself, if that's what I knew... That make sense?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ive never taken Aikido, but I wouldn't be too confident in having to defend myself, if that's what I knew... That make sense?

The OP question was about techniques in an art you’ve studied.

 

[MadMartigan]

We have a Spear Finger thrust to the solar plexus. The spear finger in general I find problematic... tiny mistake and you break your own fingers.
So why do I still teach it? For the movement principles it teaches.

The way we practice the movement is in kata or linework. The support hand performs a downward palm block (moving a guard hand out of the way ) then strike over top through the cleared path.
While I may not attempt the exact movement in a dynamic situation... the timing and coordination that it practices translate very well to punches to the abdomen... and even to versions of the 'superman' punch.

 

[lklawson]

We have a Spear Finger thrust to the solar plexus. The spear finger in general I find problematic... tiny mistake and you break your own fingers.
So why do I still teach it? For the movement principles it teaches.

The way we practice the movement is in kata or linework. The support hand performs a downward palm block (moving a guard hand out of the way ) then strike over top through the cleared path.
While I may not attempt the exact movement in a dynamic situation... the timing and coordination that it practices translate very well to punches to the abdomen... and even to versions of the 'superman' punch.

Nukite? I hate nukite. It's one of my first candidates for "technique I would never use." But there are a few times, places, and people for which it could be applicable. ...just not me, under almost any circumstance I can think of relevant to me.

That said a buddy of mine, just messing around, pecked me in the solar plex with a "duck bill" version that left me gasping for air. He was just sitting beside me and decided to thwack one in just to mess with me. Hit exactly perfect. No, it wasn't the traditional "spear hand" nukite; more like a chicken beak than a spear hand. But I was left convinced of the effectiveness of strikes to the solar plexus.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Blindside]

Techniques you learn in your MA that are probably not a good idea for Self Defense​

Ah, the kali defense against take downs.... *stands there with drawn knife* "go ahead, take me down."

Though admittedly it is also one of the early things I teach in the women's self-defense class. So maybe under the right circumstances.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Yeah, okay. I guess it’s up to the jury to decide that one.

That's always the case, regardless of the curb stomp status.

I'm not questioning your expertise. Although 40+ years of experience doesn't mean that "All is known." I'm just telling you what is out there and the history of the word and how it was taught to me.

I'm well aware of how often words are misused. In cases like this, it leads to a degradation of precision in the language. And that's a bad thing.

According to your definition.
"A compound fracture is a fracture with enough deformation that you can see it through the skin."

Does a bone sticking out of your leg not satisfy "enough deformation that you can see it through the skin."?

Sure. All open fractures are compound fractures. But not all compound fractures are open. The more precise term should be used.

 

[Steve]

That's always the case, regardless of the curb stomp status.

Not necessarily. Many... I think we can safely say most... self defense cases aren't prosecuted at all, because the response was reasonable and proportional.

When you kill or seriously injure someone who is on the ground by stomping on their head... I mean, let's be real. it's at least debatable in the best of circumstances.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Ah, the kali defense against take downs.... *stands there with drawn knife* "go ahead, take me down."

Though admittedly it is also one of the early things I teach in the women's self-defense class. So maybe under the right circumstances.

Honestly, not a bad thing to do. Let them know you're armed and a lot of people won't want to try bum rushing you anymore.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Nukite? I hate nukite. It's one of my first candidates for "technique I would never use." But there are a few times, places, and people for which it could be applicable. ...just not me, under almost any circumstance I can think of relevant to me.

That said a buddy of mine, just messing around, pecked me in the solar plex with a "duck bill" version that left me gasping for air. He was just sitting beside me and decided to thwack one in just to mess with me. Hit exactly perfect. No, it wasn't the traditional "spear hand" nukite; more like a chicken beak than a spear hand. But I was left convinced of the effectiveness of strikes to the solar plexus.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Agreed, nukite of all varieties are not practical most of the time - they are good only to the throat and eyes for us common people. This was not always true. Open hand techniques were much more common in karate's early days. It facilitated tuite (grabbing techniques) and back then, were deadly striking weapons.

First, the old karateka conditioned their hands and fingers to a degree we'd call extreme. Few karate experts back then could play the violin or piano, or become surgeons - their hands lost dexterity, their fingers lost the nails. But I would hate having their nukite thrust into my liver or bladder. But few today would choose a path of turning their hands from useful delicate tools into true bone-fused calloussed weapons.

The other factor, as you pointed out, is their application to pressure points. This was also more common in the early history of karate and kung fu. This art almost disappeared from karate (It was once part of the secret teachings and held back to the public school students as well as most others.) Without these, often hard to reach points, nukite lost some of its usefulness. I also have experienced the "chicken beak" or "crane bill" to various pressure points and am convinced of their painfulness/effectiveness as well.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Not necessarily. Many... I think we can safely say most... self defense cases aren't prosecuted at all, because the response was reasonable and proportional.

And even if you're prosecuted it won't necessarily go to a jury trial. But in any case, the action is subject to investigation and judgement by others. So... it's up to the jury to decide.

When you kill or seriously injure someone who is on the ground by stomping on their head... I mean, let's be real. it's at least debatable in the best of circumstances.

Every action taken in self-defense is debatable, even in the best of circumstances.
I am reminded of a video I saw a few years ago. The video showed an armed man in an active shooter situation being confronted by police. The video showed him dropping his gun and then the police shot him.
That all sounds horrible. And in that video, it sure looked horrible. Until you ALSO see the footage from the body cam of the officer BEHIND him. Because he dropped his weapon (which was empty) and then reached for the gun he was carrying in the small of his back. At which point "GUN" was shouted and the fellow was shot.
So depending on your viewing angle, this was either a cold blooded murder or completely justifiable self-defense.

 

[Steve]

And even if you're prosecuted it won't necessarily go to a jury trial. But in any case, the action is subject to investigation and judgement by others. So... it's up to the jury to decide.

Every action taken in self-defense is debatable, even in the best of circumstances.
I am reminded of a video I saw a few years ago. The video showed an armed man in an active shooter situation being confronted by police. The video showed him dropping his gun and then the police shot him.
That all sounds horrible. And in that video, it sure looked horrible. Until you ALSO see the footage from the body cam of the officer BEHIND him. Because he dropped his weapon (which was empty) and then reached for the gun he was carrying in the small of his back. At which point "GUN" was shouted and the fellow was shot.
So depending on your viewing angle, this was either a cold blooded murder or completely justifiable self-defense.

Okay. So you’re on one of those moods where Jury means whatever you want and cops shooting active shooters is self defense. Cool. I hope you have a good evening.

 

[dvcochran]

Okay. So you’re on one of those moods where Jury means whatever you want and cops shooting active shooters is self defense. Cool. I hope you have a good evening.

It could be self defense or could be an unsavory part of the job.
You are defending active shooters now?
Wow. Just, wow.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Okay. So you’re on one of those moods where Jury means whatever you want and cops shooting active shooters is self defense. Cool. I hope you have a good evening.

So you're in one of those moods where what you read has nothing to do with what was written. Cool. I hope you have a good evening.

 

[Steve]

You are defending active shooters now?
Wow. Just, wow.

Really? This isn’t okay. You need to stop now.

 

[Steve]

So you're in one of those moods where what you read has nothing to do with what was written. Cool. I hope you have a good evening.

Did you not equate jury trial with literally any judgment by pretty much anyone? Did you not turn a discussion about martial arts into a discussion about cops? By all means, carry on if that’s what you’re determined to do, but don’t drag me into it.

 

[dvcochran]

Really? This isn’t okay. You need to stop now.

Then you need to do a much better job of clarifying your point. What you said sounds like you are defending the active shooter. This, combined with your previous loathsome posts about LEO and it is rather easy that people wonder.

 

[Hanzou]

Not a huge fan for RNC or even mount for holding people down.

Go for Mabye a minute but if you have to hold that for twenty minutes under some fatty. Or with your knees grinding in to the concrete. You are not going to have a good day of it.

Kasegetami is king in this case.

Personally, I'd use knee on belly over mount in a SD situation.

And yeah, Kesa Gatame is preferable over mount and side control in many cases as well. I would argue that KG gives you a bit more control, and the submissions are a bit smoother to accomplish.

Mount is pretty good for dropping bows on people's heads though.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Because a guy can still be dangerous on the ground. The question isn't that he's on the ground but what state is he in when he's on the ground. Just because a person is on the ground doesn't mean that they are of no danger to you. A person that's on the ground that is unable to continue to attack you is something different. We can look at how police officers take care when putting people on the ground. They still treat that person as a threat with guns drawn.

Not nick picking, just not willing to make it a general statement as I know you are talking about someone who can no longer attack back.

Wait a minute. Have you seen the butt scoot thread? You guys play both side of the same argument.

Speaking as someone who (in that other thread) didn't think butt scooting was a good idea in a self-defense situation, not really. What JowGaWolf and DD are talking about regarding the potential threat from someone who has been put on the ground isn't that they will butt scoot towards you, get a leg entanglement, and heel hook you. Not only is that highly unlikely in a self-defense scenario, but it would be easy to counter by just walking away. They're talking about the risk of the person getting back up and continuing to attack from their feet. Whether that's a legitimate concern depends on the situation and so the question of whether you would be legally or morally justified in stomping on the opponent's head once they are down also depends on the specifics of the situation.

Also in the other thread, no one was denying that a skilled person could fight effectively from the ground against a standing opponent. (Although I would argue that would be less than the optimal choice in a real fight.) There were some (like myself) who were concerned with BJJ practitioners who only trained for competition neglecting the development of their standup and takedown skills. There were others with different opinions of what should constitute stalling under the sport rules. But I don't see anyone who is arguing opposite sides of the same argument.

 

[Hanzou]

Because a guy can still be dangerous on the ground. The question isn't that he's on the ground but what state is he in when he's on the ground. Just because a person is on the ground doesn't mean that they are of no danger to you. A person that's on the ground that is unable to continue to attack you is something different. We can look at how police officers take care when putting people on the ground. They still treat that person as a threat with guns drawn.

Not nick picking, just not willing to make it a general statement as I know you are talking about someone who can no longer attack back.

The goal of self defense is to end the threat. If the other person is on the ground, this may or may not mean the threat has ended. If it hasn't, curb stomping their head may well be a good choice.

Wouldn't choking someone out or even a joint break be preferable to a curb stomp?

 

[Dirty Dog]

Wouldn't choking someone out or even a joint break be preferable to a curb stomp?

Sometimes. Given that there are uncountable different scenarios, pretty much anything is sometimes. And pretty much nothing is never.
For example, you're choking them out, and their buddy stabs you. Maybe you should have curb stomped the first one.