# Differences between MA/DT/SD/H2H/Etc...



## Indie12 (Dec 21, 2011)

I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.

In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
Are their truly any differences?
Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?
Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?


----------



## Cyriacus (Dec 21, 2011)

Realistically, the Terms should be Interchangeable.

Its complicated. Im going to favor Replying to Replies, here.
Theyre all based on the same Idea. Everything else is subjective to the Organisation itself.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 21, 2011)

Cyriacus said:


> Realistically, the Terms should be Interchangeable.
> 
> Its complicated. Im going to favor Replying to Replies, here.
> Theyre all based on the same Idea. Everything else is subjective to the Organisation itself.



I agree, they truly are interchangeable. Which is why I wonder sometimes how people define them differently?


----------



## Cyriacus (Dec 21, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> I agree, they truly are interchangeable. Which is why I wonder sometimes how people define them differently?


For the same reason why TMA and MMA (As in, Modern Martial Arts) need to be distunguished, when many MMA are just an adapted TMA System. Kajukenbo, for example. An MMA that operates in a TMA manner, but which is by all means an MMA.

EDIT: As in, they DONT need to be distinguished.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 21, 2011)

Cyriacus said:


> For the same reason why TMA and MMA (As in, Modern Martial Arts) need to be distunguished, when many MMA are just an adapted TMA System. Kajukenbo, for example. An MMA that operates in a TMA manner, but which is by all means an MMA.
> 
> EDIT: As in, they DONT need to be distinguished.



'Modern Martial Arts (MMA)' now that's a term you don't hear too often, (least I don't). A majority of the 'MMA' you hear or talk about refers to 'Mixed Martial Arts (MMA), which is different.

I agree completely with that!


----------



## Blindside (Dec 21, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?



I define "Martial Arts" as having to do with war, so "war arts."  So this includes a whole category of training that modern self-defense simply doesn't require, the training and experience on running logistics for a unit/army is a martial art.  The operation of a M2 or M4 or F-18 are also "martial arts" that don't fall into categories that I would classify as either defensive tactics or hand to hand combat techniques.  

As we get down to close range combat then clearly there are overlaps, but there are a couple of distinctions.  "Defensive Tactics" is usually a term associated with LEO training in their duties to protect themselves and others, and may involve heavy training in a use of force continuum that is not as emphasized in the war arts.  How many Marines do you see kitted with OC spray and tasers?  Clearly there is a different focus in their training.  But there is overlap as well, the urban warfare techniques of that Marine unit and a SWAT team stacking a door may be essentially identical, and both are also not really part of what I would consider "self-defense" or "self-protection" techniques.  To differentiate between DT and "hand-to-hand," there are procedures in place for the LEO that won't be in place for the civilian, how to safely handcuff someone is not a typical civilian training procedure.

 I consider "self-defense/protection" training to consist of a range of physical and non-physical training for protection of the individual.  Knowing about how to defuse an aggressive social confrontation or about keeping your awareness up about the world around you are all parts of that training.  The training for hand-to-hand combat or close quarters combat is just that, training in the striking/grappling/counter-weapon/weapon use at relatively close range, you can train for this and forgo other important parts of self-defense training, but by itself it does not qualify as "self-defense" training, but it may be part of it.  

And again there are overlaps, handgun operation between a civilian training for "self-defense," a LEO, or a member of the military may be identical, so is their standing armbar or elbow strike.


----------



## punisher73 (Dec 21, 2011)

"Martial arts" is such a broad term.  It is used for any skill set that relates to war.  But, usually when the term is said people are referring to an asian system of combat whether empty hand or weapon.  Some will still use the term for western weapons arts, and even more recently are putting western wrestling and boxing into the mix.

As to the other terms, Defensive tactics, H2H, and combatives.  They are all derived from the empty hand systems of martial arts.  Sometimes they use the terms for the target audience and environment that they are to be used in.  For example, DT usually refers to the methods used by law enforcement and combatives refer to the methods used by soldiers in war.  Even h2h is a catch all for empty handed fighting done by police or soldiers.

But, ALL of those terms are under the umbrella of martial arts.


----------



## MJS (Dec 21, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.
> 
> In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
> Are their truly any differences?
> ...



I'd say there are alot of similarities and alot of differences.  I'm not going to list each similarity/difference seperate, but instead, make an overall generalization.  IMHO, I'd say the major difference is the path that each takes.  The end result, for the most part, is the same....to survive an encounter.  Each most likely has the same kicks, punches, and blocks, however, the way they're trained and applied will vary.  MAs are probably the only one out of the list, that has things like kata and certain traditions, that depending on the art, will need to be followed.  

Application...like I said, that will vary.  Some MAs tend to be static, almost robot like, whereas H2H/RBSD may include more boxing type drills.  The MAs may not be as open to looking outside the art, for other ways to do things, yet the other things you listed probably will.  Take a little from BJJ, a little from Krav, a little here and there, mix it all up, but a strict TMA may not want to do that.  

So, like I said, the goals are most likely the same, but slight differences will be there with the others.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 21, 2011)

Think of a pyramid.  The base is the widest, deepest study of the subject, and that's martial arts.  It can encompass lots of things, some of which may have no real function, but serve simply to preserve an idea or concept.  Whether it works or not doesn't really matter; the beauty and flow and completeness of the motion is important.  (This doesn't mean that someone training in martial arts is ineffective, only that they have the widest scope.)

Moving to a smaller tier, we have martial sports.  Here, we lose some of the pretty stuff, and weight what we keep by whether it serves us well in the competitive arena.  If our competition is in forms or kata, we'll sacrifice some combative principles to add some showmanship.  Or we'll shape our stances or techniques around the rule set we're playing under.  If that's no punches to the head, we don't practice them.  If it's light contact with an emphasis on speed to get in and "count coup" -- that's what we'll work on.  The techniques may not be combatively effective -- but they work in the arena they're designed for.

Climbing a bit more, to an even tighter level, we have police/security DT and similar approaches.  There are goals here beyond mere survival; subduing the bad guy, containing, controlling, and cuffing the bad guy.  Or maybe it's holding and controlling a patient so that they can be treated without harming them more than absolutely necessary.  We've moved into the real world -- but we still have some rules, too.  The goal here is often simple techniques that are easily taught and easily retained with minimal practice, and a high likelihood of successful application.

The smallest tier is self defense.  Military Hand-to-hand, civilian self defense...  The rules are pretty much out the window.  Techniques here are quick, brutal, and the sole criteria is effectiveness.  The goal is to dominate an attacker or fighting situation and escape with your hide intact.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 21, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.
> 
> In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
> Are their truly any differences?



They can be very different, and are not really interchangable at all, unless you don't understand what they refer to.



Indie12 said:


> Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?



No, although many do. But first you'd need to come to some understanding of what the term martial art refers to, really.



Indie12 said:


> Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?



Yes there are differences in each case, ranging from subtle and relatively small to gigantic gaps between them, depending on exactly what you're looking at as specific examples of each.

MARTIAL ARTS: A systematic approach to combat based around usage in a specific environment, with the techniques being expressions of the philosophy (values and beliefs) of the system itself. Such values and beliefs can range enormously, as can the environment the system is designed for, ranging from purely unarmed, grappling only tournaments with specific rule-sets, to medieval combat with archaic weapons, from single ranges to multi ranged combat, from almost pacifist approaches through to practically cold-blooded murder in their intent. Some key factors, though, include the idea of martial arts being longer-term studies, with a number of years (at least) being needed to be dedicated to get past the simple idea of "here's how you do this kick", hence not being ideal for security, military, or self defence, as each of these require immediate results rather than gradual development of a deeper skill set.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: Hmm, I"m not fond of these concepts to begin with... Self defence isn't really about the techniques, it's more abour awareness and education. But, that said, many do just look at physical techniques and label that as "self defence", so let's look at that. As noted in the Martial Art description, self defence needs to be immediately applicable, which lends itself to simple, direct, gross motor actions which remove advantages of size and strength. Targets are typically soft and difficult (or impossible) to build up for protection (eyes, groin, complex joints like ankles or the knee). Most typically, a "self defence" course lasts a total of about 8-10 hours, which might be over a day, a weekend, or 1-2 hour long classes over a few weeks. At that point the martial art is just beginning, but the self defence course is finished.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTac approaches are closer to the "self defence" course listed above. Again, the aim is a developed skill in a short amount of time, but the potential audience is more likely to be LEO's, Security, or Military, where there is a small amount of time allotted to training, and the best result in that time is required. Unlike the self defence course, which will try to cover a wide range of possible personal assaults, DefTac training is more likely to be an intensive training course on a single, or reduced aspect, such as use of a particular tool (baton), or a particular scenario (knife assault). It is commonly a small number of principles taught, rather that "techniques", which can then be adapted to the situation or environment the practitioner might find themselves in. Training tends to involve a lot of repetition of basic drills, all exploring the same principles.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is typically a Military term, especially with the suffix "combatives", and was commonly used from WWI-WWII and beyond. Most commonly today it is used to refer to the WWII form, such as the methods of Fairbairn or Applegate. It was used to differentiate between close-quarters combat and rifle combat, really. The aim was to look for pure efficacy of technique, and, to be frank, it didn't have much more of a base than Fairbairn's and Applegate's (and others) personal talent, understanding, and experience. While the Hand2Hand aspect specifically referred to unarmed methods, including striking, throwing, choking, and more, it also tended to include close quarters weapons such as knives as well. To differentiate this from martial arts, all you need to do is look to martial art weaponry systems, such as Kenjutsu, Escrima, Kyudo, and so on. Hardly "hand to hand".

But when it all comes down to it, I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction. You're looking just at the 'technique' side of things, which is really just the expression of the real differences. The reason DefTac methods are different to Combative methods, which are different to Martial Art methods, which are different to Self Defence methods is down to what they are aiming to achieve, rather than just being a collection of mechanical techniques in the first place. The question is really if the training methods are different, as that is where the techniques come from, and give the techniques their context for you to understand them in the first place.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> They can be very different, and are not really interchangable at all, unless you don't understand what they refer to.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Negative, Chris. I was referring to an overall similarities and differences between them all. I disagree with you on your assessment!! But what you wrote in your response in the "definitions" pretty much reinforces what the question above was asking. That is, is their any differences, and according to what you wrote, basically there's not! But please correct me if that's inaccurate!

And yes, I do know the differences and understandings, (in my opinion), and I've been doing this for quite a while and in different arenas!!

Keep em coming!


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

You may want to re-read it, then, as there are some very big differences between each of the different categorisations.... after all, that's why there are different categories....


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> You may want to re-read it, then, as there are some very big differences between each of the different categorisations.... after all, that's why there are different categories....




I have read them and if your talking concepts, then yes! But in general and technique wise, negative!

Here's a run down of (in my opinion) the concepts:
MA- systematic approach to armed or unarmed combat.
SD- General application, concept, and method of defending against attacks and surviving encounters.
DT- (Depending on which one your talking about) is either Military, Law Enforcement, or Civilian, and deals with different elements of Physical, Mental, and Legal applications of Physical force.
H2H- Either Military, Law Enfocement, or Civilian approach to unarmed or armed combat, I.E. Killing, or severe bodily harm! (For example, Krav Maga, MCMAP, MACP, Or Martial Arts)

So, In my opinion and in short, basically they are all under the same umbrella in terms of general category. "Martial Arts"

I will also add, that your definition is either by pre 1960 hand2hand combatives, which is a little different than todays combatives programs. Rex Applegate's h2h program is still used to this day, although it has been updated to fit today's needs by US Military.


----------



## Buka (Dec 22, 2011)

There are differences, yes. As in apples and oranges - both being fruit. 

Th term "Defensive Tactics", at least as I know it, only applies to Law Enforcement. It is an animal all to it's own. The dangers in DT do not end with the threat, they end with your written report, which can be even more dangerous than the bad guy you just dealt with. There are more rules associated with Defensive Tactics than with any art I've seen or heard of.

As for the term "Martial Arts" - Tai-Chi and MMA are both Martial Arts. While they might have related principles, they're about as different as different can be. BJJ, Tae-kwon-do and boxing are all fighting arts, but, again, as different as it gets.

As for Hand to Hand Combat, I believe the proper term would be marriage.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

In general, yes, they're different. In terms of technique, well, as I said, I think you're looking at it backwards there.... but, again, yes, they're different. Let's look at them from a purely technical standpoint, if you insist....

MARTIAL ARTS: Technically, the exact approach to technical aspects depends entirely on the martial art itself, but there will be a greater presence of fine motor techniques, skill building techniques (techniques not designed for combative excellence or even effectiveness, really), as opposed to each other category mentioned. Also, depending on the system, the techniques may very easily be deliberately over-done (by todays legal standards and social violence standards), with broken bones or lethal responses to attacks such as a simple single or double hand grab, or, in some arts I know, you simply walk up to someone and kill them.

Additionally, the martial art in question will have it's technical make up defined by it's history, it's environment, and more. Japanese arts will tend towards grappling, Chinese and Korean towards striking and kicking, the types of targets approached, the types of strikes used, the types of kicks used, the types of weaponry encountered, and far more move this category the furthest from each of the others.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: As I said, these will be geared towards gross motor, as opposed to the martial arts approach having both gross motor and fine motor, and will have a primary technical approach of creating damage in order to escape, not kill or attack. Techniques are unrefined (from a martial art standpoint), relying on "survival instincts" and attacks towards soft targets. This is very different to a martial art technical approach.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTacs programs don't tend towards "techniques" at all, really, other than to drill the principles which is what DefTacs training is all about. From a technical standpoint, the tendancy is towards gross motor again, and can be more "aggressive" than the self defence forms. Being geared up for military, police, and security, escape isn't the high priority, so the technical approach is to be more pro-active in most cases. That again changes the types of techniques preferred here.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is probably the closest to the martial art approach, as it can deal with more lethal approaches (again, though, that depends on the martial art in question...), but is still not a martial arts approach. It is more realistically a collection of almost random techniques, all chosen to suit what are felt to be common situations and conditions. It can be similar or different, really, with no way to definitively say one way or the other.

Really, the big difference is in the aims of each category, as that leads to the differences in technical approaches. You might as well ask if all martial arts use the same techniques, honestly. It really is looking at it backwards.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Buka said:


> There are differences, yes. As in apples and oranges - both being fruit.
> 
> Th term "Defensive Tactics", at least as I know it, only applies to Law Enforcement. It is an animal all to it's own. The dangers in DT do not end with the threat, they end with your written report, which can be even more dangerous than the bad guy you just dealt with. There are more rules associated with Defensive Tactics than with any art I've seen or heard of.
> 
> ...



Concept wise, yes technically, but not really technique wise. 

Defensive Tactics mainly refers to Law Enforcement, but can also refer to Military, Security, Corrections, Fire/EMS, Courts, and other governmental and city entities. Yes, the paperwork is a hassle!!


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> In general, yes, they're different. In terms of technique, well, as I said, I think you're looking at it backwards there.... but, again, yes, they're different. Let's look at them from a purely technical standpoint, if you insist....
> 
> MARTIAL ARTS: Technically, the exact approach to technical aspects depends entirely on the martial art itself, but there will be a greater presence of fine motor techniques, skill building techniques (techniques not designed for combative excellence or even effectiveness, really), as opposed to each other category mentioned. Also, depending on the system, the techniques may very easily be deliberately over-done (by todays legal standards and social violence standards), with broken bones or lethal responses to attacks such as a simple single or double hand grab, or, in some arts I know, you simply walk up to someone and kill them.
> 
> ...



Like I said if your speaking from a concept basis, I suppose. But I was referring to an overall similarities and differences. Im not sure what you mean by backwards in this case? 

Again, here are the main similarities and differences, (if your using concepts, I suppose)

Martial Arts- Systematic approach to unarmed or armed combat, or sport)

Defensive Tactics- Legal, Medical, Tactical approach to physical control or restraint, or survival- in other words they provide not only motor skills and 'know hows' to restraining and control or disable, using the 'Use of Force' approach, they also teach physical restraint with legal implications. It depends on which organization, agency, or program you use. Basically the idea is to learn physical, legal, and tactical approaches to get a subject under control and then being able to justify those reasons through documentation. 

Self Defense- Physical method of protecting oneself or others using physical force. This can be done in short period (1-4 hours) or long term periods (1-3 months)

H2H- Combat, Disable, or Killing.

Gross Motor Skills can be found in any of these categories. But if your talking about categories as in "differences/similarities" yeah they can all be under the "Martial Art" umbrella, since they all use Martial Art principles. 

Just for the record: I've done Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Martial Arts, and H2H training. There really are more similiarities, then differences! Although, I will give you that there are differences!

Again, I'm not sure what your referring to as backwards here? The differences in techniques aren't all different. Concepts, slightly.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

By "backwards" I mean that the differences in technical approaches isn't the point, it's the result of the actual differences. If you're looking at technical differences, then you've really missed the point. Additionally, what self defence  program are you talking about? Which H2H methodology? Which DefTac program? And which martial art? There are gigantic differences within each category, with the broadest being found in the martial arts category. 

I'll put it this way, what do you mean by "martial art"?

This?





Or this?





Maybe this?





So how about this?





Then we have this...





Or this....





How about this?





Or this perhaps?





Maybe this?





Honestly, I can keep going with more and more varied technical approaches to martial arts here, so without a base for comparison, there's really little that can be said. Except that, by dirnt of their different requirements, each of the different categories will have different technical approaches. It's just a matter of how well you can recognise that. After all, a punch is not just a punch when dealing with these types of discussions....


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Well like I said, I wasn't using any specifics, I was being general or broad! If you want specifics, go ahead and PM me.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

No, it doesn't work that way. You brought this question into a public forum, questions such as what exactly you had or have in mind as your construct of "martial arts" or otherwise should be answered in public as well. A PM conversation adds nothing to the thread, the discussion, the forum, or actual communication, honestly. Same with your request of PM responses to your question on BJJ's "Guard" position. For a public forum, you really should be prepared to answer questions publicly, otherwise I'd suggest not bothering.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Well yeah technical approaches is the point, because if your referring to different concepts, which use different ideologies, methods, "rules". Then, yes there are differences in ideologies and approaches. But overall in technical approaches, as in techniques (punch, kick, throw, hold, etc) there aren't any differences in technique application (with a few exceptions... Sport, control, killing, disabling, etc) I was referring to an overall broader or more non-specific approach. I think you've missed the point the original post!!


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

There are gigantic differences, in broad strokes and finer details, though. I don't think you get what you're asking, honestly.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> No, it doesn't work that way. You brought this question into a public forum, questions such as what exactly you had or have in mind as your construct of "martial arts" or otherwise should be answered in public as well. A PM conversation adds nothing to the thread, the discussion, the forum, or actual communication, honestly. Same with your request of PM responses to your question on BJJ's "Guard" position. For a public forum, you really should be prepared to answer questions publicly, otherwise I'd suggest not bothering.




Well like I said, it was on a broader question, no specifics. And if you want an answer to your questions specifically, PM me. In regards to the BJJ guard position, that has nothing to do with this forum, and it's easier for me to get replies that way, I rarely go into that specific forum, which is why I requested a PM. I don't care if you have a problem with PM, but it works well for me!!


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> There are gigantic differences, in broad strokes and finer details, though. I don't think you get what you're asking, honestly.



Go back and re-read the original posting, I had NO specifics!!! And please don't question my intelligence! It's rude.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.
> 
> In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
> Are their truly any differences?
> ...



Just in case you for whatever reason cannot go back up and re-read it. Here's the original posting I posted! Notice any specifics or details?


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

Firstly, I'm not questioning your intelligence, I'm questioning your understanding of what you're asking about. Bit different there.

Next, how on earth do you expect to have a conversation about the technical differences or similarities of something so broad as "martial arts" without getting into specifics? Seriously, I have no idea how you'd do that. Believe me, I've read your OP a number of times, and I find it completely and utterly flawed due, primarily, to that lack of specificity. You really can't discuss the difference between martial arts and DefTac programs, for instance, without first coming to some understanding of what is meant by "martial arts" and "Defensive tactics" in the first place. That's really why I'm saying you don't really get what you're asking, as it's like asking what the difference is between European food and Asian food, then arguing that they're both the same because they're both food, without saying whether you're talking about Italian and Japanese, or French and Chinese, or even Spanish and Korean, let alone English and Thai. Each are vastly different, but there can be no discussion without the specifics you are missing in the first place.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

First off all, personal attacks, aren't they not allowed? Do NOT insult me!!
Secondly, RE-READ the Original Post, there were NO specifics, it was broad. Martial Arts is a broad subject!! I was referring to an overall assessment with no specific details or points. RE-READ THE ORIGINAL POST!!
Lastly, name five other postings in which specifics were needed, in which I've posted?

You know, I can honestly say I have no idea where your coming from, it's almost like your wanting to have an argument, rather then a debate! But I'm not into arguing and this conversation between you and me is over!!

BTW: Have you been following me? Kinda scary and sick, actually!!


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 22, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> First off all, personal attacks, aren't they not allowed? Do NOT insult me!!



I haven't insulted you yet, though. I've made observations. Saying that your thread is missing details for it to be a valid point of contention or debate/discussion, and that that shows me that you are lacking in some understanding of the concepts you're trying to address isn't an insult, it's a statement of observation. You may want to take a deep breath and re-read with that in mind.



Indie12 said:


> Secondly, RE-READ the Original Post, there were NO specifics, it was broad. Martial Arts is a broad subject!! I was referring to an overall assessment with no specific details or points. RE-READ THE ORIGINAL POST!!
> Lastly, name five other postings in which specifics were needed, in which I've posted?



The catch is, though, that I know there aren't any specifics, and that's what I'm saying is the issue. There needs to be specifics if there can be any discussion, otherwise there's nothing that can be said, as the parameters that each side is talking about could be many miles apart, leading to no real discussion at all.



Indie12 said:


> You know, I can honestly say I have no idea where your coming from, it's almost like your wanting to have an argument, rather then a debate! But I'm not into arguing and this conversation between you and me is over!!



Seeking clarification of what you're trying to ask about isn't "seeking argument", it's seeking clarification. Seriously, deep breath, realise that I haven't been anything other than gentle and polite so far, and maybe you could get a discussion out of this yet. At this point, with no parameters, it's really not possible... and honestly, that's hardly something that you can blame me for.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

Blindside said:


> I define "Martial Arts" as having to do with war, so "war arts." So this includes a whole category of training that modern self-defense simply doesn't require, the training and experience on running logistics for a unit/army is a martial art. The operation of a M2 or M4 or F-18 are also "martial arts" that don't fall into categories that I would classify as either defensive tactics or hand to hand combat techniques.
> 
> As we get down to close range combat then clearly there are overlaps, but there are a couple of distinctions. "Defensive Tactics" is usually a term associated with LEO training in their duties to protect themselves and others, and may involve heavy training in a use of force continuum that is not as emphasized in the war arts. How many Marines do you see kitted with OC spray and tasers? Clearly there is a different focus in their training. But there is overlap as well, the urban warfare techniques of that Marine unit and a SWAT team stacking a door may be essentially identical, and both are also not really part of what I would consider "self-defense" or "self-protection" techniques. To differentiate between DT and "hand-to-hand," there are procedures in place for the LEO that won't be in place for the civilian, how to safely handcuff someone is not a typical civilian training procedure.
> 
> ...




I would agree with overlaps and yes, I'd agree there are differences! For example, you are correct in that Defensive Tactics is mainly a Law Enforcement program, however other entities, such as Corrections, Security, Fire/EMS, Government and City authorities, use their own version of Defensive Tactics. It depends on which state your in to which training you mainly receive. Use of Force, attack pyramid, legal-tactical-medical aspects, and physical and voice training is usually what are included in a DT program. For example, EMS/Fire, are taught in DT usually, about awareness, avoidance, use of force, and escaping. Not so much on the striking, control, or takedown concepts. Yes, handcuffing is usually a Law Enforcement part of DT training. However there are some civilians who carry restraints and make citizen arrests. Other aspects of DT that could be carried over to civilian is information such as Use of Force, Attack Pyramid, or Basic techniques of SD. 

Self Defense or Self protection, is what I would define as usually a public defensive training program. Mainly used to teach others basic techniques by which to defend themselves or loved one's from attack. 

H2H, actually yes, Marines do carry tasers and OC Spray (MP's) and are also trained to use what's called MCMAP with OC spray in their face. So yes, you could by far see a marine or military MP carrying a taster or OC.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> "Martial arts" is such a broad term. It is used for any skill set that relates to war. But, usually when the term is said people are referring to an asian system of combat whether empty hand or weapon. Some will still use the term for western weapons arts, and even more recently are putting western wrestling and boxing into the mix.
> 
> As to the other terms, Defensive tactics, H2H, and combatives. They are all derived from the empty hand systems of martial arts. Sometimes they use the terms for the target audience and environment that they are to be used in. For example, DT usually refers to the methods used by law enforcement and combatives refer to the methods used by soldiers in war. Even h2h is a catch all for empty handed fighting done by police or soldiers.
> 
> But, ALL of those terms are under the umbrella of martial arts.



Agreed (with the 'broad' and umbrella points!) For the record, I was being broad on the question(s). I wasn't referring to just asian, european, or american Martial Arts, just in general, overall assessment. But your right, in general when people use the term 'Martial Arts' they are often referring to asian arts, for whatever reason!


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 22, 2011)

If you've got a problem with a post or think it violates the rules, use the Report To Moderators button.  It looks like a triangle with an exclamation point inside.

And, incidentally, the purpose of a discussion board is discussion -- not fueling Private Messaging or emails.  The rules here at MT strongly encourage users to keep discussions public...


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 23, 2011)

Sorry, JKS, but as this was a public accusation, I'd prefer to publicly address it. My apologies for continuing this for the minute.



Indie12 said:


> BTW: Have you been following me? Kinda scary and sick, actually!!



I didn't see this edit of yours yesterday as I was replying to the initial post, but frankly this is rather offensive to me. The only other thread we were both involved in (White spike's "my training" one) was really not something that can be seen as "following" you, as I at no time was dealing with your posts there, and, more importantly, posted in that thread before you did. The accusation of "following you", as well as the implication of it being "sick" is completely baseless and something I consider a slur against myself. I expect a retraction and apology, especially after the arrogant PM containing an article on "Dealing with Rude People" that you sent me. And no, I'm not kidding here, I sincerely expect a retraction and apology, publicly.


----------



## Grenadier (Dec 23, 2011)

Asking for PM's / e-mails defeats the purpose of public discourse.  Remember, the purpose of this forum is to provide a place where we can discuss the martial arts in a civil, productive manner.  

That being said...

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy [url]http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71377[/URL]. 

Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). 

Thank you.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 23, 2011)

I would've loved to have kept it civil, however, a certain individual had to make it personal and then asked a question which required multiple responses, outside the original posting.

When you have 'certain' individuals who are wanting to cause trouble, it makes it hard to continue a discussion. I believe I handled it respectfully, productive and mature!!

And yes, I just used the "ignore" button and it works wonders! 

That's why I terminated the conversation, in order to maintain the peace! However, I do disagree, with the PM mention. If a conversation or question requires more written room then there's room in the forum for (not sure what the limited space for text in the forums are), then shouldn't a PM or e-mail be considered to continue to conversation?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 23, 2011)

Am totally puzzled, Chris is one of the most polite and respectful people on here, even when exasperated. I haven't seen anything he said that was personal and often answers do require multiple responses, it's one of the good things about discussions on here that they can be wide ranging and informative. if you use PMs and emails the rest of us are left out of the conversation thereby ignoring us, the whole point of posting here is to share.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 23, 2011)

It's a fact of life on message boards...  Sometimes, no matter how carefully you word something, it gets misread.  Or threads go off in directions that were never planned or intended by the original poster.  But if everyone figuratively picks up their ball and goes home when that happens, or just decides only to have a conversation via PM...  Then nobody learns from it.

I think this is a great topic.  But it's also clear we have different views...  Mine & Chris's aren't identical (in fact, in some ways, I think we might be pretty far apart.  I'm going to have to read his posts carefully before I go further on that...) but we can certainly discuss them.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 24, 2011)

jks9199 said:


> It's a fact of life on message boards... Sometimes, no matter how carefully you word something, it gets misread. Or threads go off in directions that were never planned or intended by the original poster. But if everyone figuratively picks up their ball and goes home when that happens, or just decides only to have a conversation via PM... Then nobody learns from it.
> 
> I think this is a great topic. But it's also clear we have different views... Mine & Chris's aren't identical (in fact, in some ways, I think we might be pretty far apart. I'm going to have to read his posts carefully before I go further on that...) but we can certainly discuss them.



Agreed in regards to how the thread might've been misread or misinterpreted. Although, I have a different opinion about the use of the PM, especially if the topic does become 'emotionally charged' and things are said. That's what I meant when I mentioned the PM. Plus, the point of the topic wasn't anything in specific, which is how and why I chose the PM route. True, no one learns anything by PM or e-mail (which I don't do, 'e-mail' on a message board, too risky). However, I also believe when an individual requests information on a boarder and specific oriented conversation, I.E. 'specific details' certaining a large and broad topic, PM's are appropriate based on the space saved by using it rather then the forum. I mean if a discussion forum has PM's and then complains by the use of them, then what's the point of having or allowing PM's to begin with? Or allowing e-mail interaction via forum? Doesn't make sense. 

But bottom line, I'm all for having a good civil and respectful discussion and debate, but when someone starts insulting or questioning your understanding of the very topic you posted, it makes it quite hard to keep it civil! (Which is why certain buttons work wonders!) 

I'd be more than happy to return to the topic originally discussed and hear other's opinions. But I don't tolerate disrepect and that's what happened in this case!


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 24, 2011)

jks9199 said:


> It's a fact of life on message boards... Sometimes, no matter how carefully you word something, it gets misread. Or threads go off in directions that were never planned or intended by the original poster. But if everyone figuratively picks up their ball and goes home when that happens, or just decides only to have a conversation via PM... Then nobody learns from it.
> 
> I think this is a great topic. But it's also clear we have different views... Mine & Chris's aren't identical (in fact, in some ways, I think we might be pretty far apart. I'm going to have to read his posts carefully before I go further on that...) but we can certainly discuss them.



Agree/Disagree!! He certainly didn't show me any of that!! 

And if everyone would please take another look at the initial topic, I did include 'IN YOUR OWN OPINION'!! Also, If you notice I left the topic broad for a number of reasons, they are ALOT of elements to this topic, therefore by making it detailed oriented, or specific oriented, it would take alot of space and debate just to get through all the little bits and pieces of them. That's why this topic was left broad, it made for a better discussion (until recently) where there was no set specifics or details, just an overall impression.

When he asked for specific details, I DID give him a brief rundown, although I must say that's not easy given the amount of materials for each section. But sometimes you just can't satisfy everyone and this was one of those times! 

I'm all for having a great civic and good discussion, but when another party starts questioning one's intelligence or understanding of the topic they posted, or when another party brings up materials irrelevant to the current discussion, it makes it quite hard to have a civil and intelligent debate! Which is exactly the reason why I ceased the conversation, 1) it wasn't going anywhere, and didn't make much sense. 2) items were being brought into it which were irrelevant to the topic at hand. I've read the rules and regulations for this forum, one of them which states basically, there will no personal insults, attacks, or remarks (I dont' have the exact wording) but it seems to me that's what happened here, with the other party initating that part of the conversation. Sure I'm just as guilty for participating, but I'm also the one who ceased the conversation. I'm just saying, good conversations and discussions usually are done with disagreements and agreements, but not with insults or assumptions! And I've done quite a few discussions!!


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 24, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
> Are their truly any differences?
> Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?
> Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?



Quite a good question.  I'd like to tackle it in pieces;



> Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?



Yes.  Regardless of the name used, they all derive from a martial art based theory.



> Are their truly any differences?



Ideally, no.  Realistically, yes.  

Martial art is an all encompassing term theses days.  Originally, a martial art was meant, in large part, for one thing....defeating an attacker in armed or unarmed personal combat.  Yes, esoteric venues have been attached to it through the years such as sport, health, social interaction etc.  But martial arts in-and-of-themselves are movements designed to cause injury and/or pain to another for self-preservation or to defeat an action.  Nowadays however, martial arts may mean self-defense or it may mean twirling a glow in the dark 'numchuck' to music in order to compete for a trophy or ribbon.  It may mean its the thing you do Mondays and Thursdays while Tuesdays and Fridays are reserved for bowling.  Or it could mean, for some folks, a means of training to protect yourself in armed or unarmed combat.  Ask 10 different 'martial artists' and you'll likely get 10 different answers.

Defensive Tactics (D.T.) is usually the term used in law enforcement.  It is the term I/we use when we're teaching L.E. and Corrections academies.  While used for self-protection, D.T. also covers techniques that can be used to transport or secure an individual.  Terms such as 'bent wrist' or 'goose neck' are used as well as 'hammer lock' and 'pain compliance'.  It is usually a VERY simple course.  The techniques have sound principles that IF trained for consistently will often produce positive results.  Unfortunately, the bulk of L.E. and Corrections doesn't routinely train with D.T. or firearms beyond the academy.  The individual that goes on to take martial arts or advance D.T. (or shooting for that matter) are few and far between.  Such advanced D.T. course include such programs as S.P.E.A.R. (SPontaneous Enabling Accelerated Response) by Tony Blauer, PCR (Physical Conflict Resolution) by Gen Good (Seal Team Six), Boatman's Edged Weapon Defense by the late Sir Peter Boatman or Israeli Instinctive Shooting and/or Israeli Urban Survival (Hisardut Krav Maga) by several former Israeli commandoes.  I've taken the instructor course for each of these and they are, hands down, among the most hard-core D.T. combatives courses out there.  I'd place them in the H2H section as well.

Self-Defense can be contained within the martial arts or D.T. sections.  It could also be a short-term course designed for the civilian that doesn't take further education in the venue.  Just as with D.T., it usually offers simple but effective methods of (usually) unarmed defense.  If the person would train with such methods, at least periodically they would likely be well served for the majority of altercations they may find themselves in.  If they don't....well we train to live and live to train is the old saying.

H2H is basically (usually) meant for military (or advanced L.E./Corrections team/individuals).  More than self-defense, it could be termed self-offense just as easily.  H2H often is doing something dynamic and terminal to someone as opposed to defensive movements designed to defeat an attacker.  Fathers of modern H2H would include William Fairbairn, Pat 'Dermott' O'Neill, Col. Rex Applegate, Charles Nelson, Carl Cestari and others.  Without trying to make a shameless plug for Martial Warrior, there are a collection of articles and videos in the SD section for anyone interested http://excoboard.com/martialwarrior/148250.  H2H reading material would include 'Kill or be Killed' and 'Get Tough'.  As an interesting note, and I've mentioned this before, Pat 'Dermott' O'Neill of WW2 combatives fame was at one time the highest ranked non-Japanese Judoka in the world.  His WW2 H2H combatives teaching included NO Judo of any kind.  No sporting elements went into its development.  He was quite strict on that point.

H2H was trained quickly and trained hard.  Often less than 24 hours of training.  Yet it was all based on gross motor skill by rote to be retained in long term memory and highly usable under duress.  It succeeded.  There are cases such as the senior citizen (and former FSSF member) who took out an armed robber at a 7-11 based ONLY on what he learned from O'Neill back in WW2.  As I said, retained in long term memory was the goal of the training.  My step-father told me of a similar incident involving the town drunk who at one time was also a WW2 combatives trainer.  Suffice it to say that no one picked on him after an incident.

Hope this may have been of some interest.  If the OP doesn't mind, I'm going to put this on MW as well as it is really a good question and I don't want to have to retype my post.

Stay safe everyone


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 25, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> I would've loved to have kept it civil, however, a certain individual had to make it personal and then asked a question which required multiple responses, outside the original posting.
> 
> When you have 'certain' individuals who are wanting to cause trouble, it makes it hard to continue a discussion. I believe I handled it respectfully, productive and mature!!



So I take it there's no apology? Oh, and as for "respectfully, productive and mature!!", I'd suggest no, personally. I don't consider accusations of stalking respectful, nor the lack of apology when the lack of base for such an accusation is pointed out, refusing to clarify what you're saying, trying to get things taken to PM when it's not needed, arbitrarily shutting down conversations because you don't understand what you're being asked, and then putting people on ignore rather than listen to them (or everyone else who say there was no personal attack nor any emotionally heated comments from my side) is hardly "productive", and as for "mature!!"? Nope, not really...



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> And yes, I just used the "ignore" button and it works wonders!



Works wonders how? There weren't any more answers from me, and all it means is that you can ignore my requests from previous posts... 



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> That's why I terminated the conversation, in order to maintain the peace! However, I do disagree, with the PM mention. If a conversation or question requires more written room then there's room in the forum for (not sure what the limited space for text in the forums are), then shouldn't a PM or e-mail be considered to continue to conversation?



Just to clarify, PMs do have a character limit, as well as there being a limit on the number of messages you can have, which is not the case for in thread posts. So, uh, nope. That argument has no merit. And that's not what the PM function is there for.



Indie12 said:


> Agreed in regards to how the thread might've been misread or misinterpreted. Although, I have a different opinion about the use of the PM, especially if the topic does become 'emotionally charged' and things are said. That's what I meant when I mentioned the PM. Plus, the point of the topic wasn't anything in specific, which is how and why I chose the PM route. True, no one learns anything by PM or e-mail (which I don't do, 'e-mail' on a message board, too risky). However, I also believe when an individual requests information on a boarder and specific oriented conversation, I.E. 'specific details' certaining a large and broad topic, PM's are appropriate based on the space saved by using it rather then the forum. I mean if a discussion forum has PM's and then complains by the use of them, then what's the point of having or allowing PM's to begin with? Or allowing e-mail interaction via forum? Doesn't make sense.



PMs and emails are for personal interaction between members so as not to detract from a thread, questions posed in thread to do with the thread itself should be answered in the thread itself. And you can't really get more thread related than someone asking the thread starter "What are you referring to here?"



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> But bottom line, I'm all for having a good civil and respectful discussion and debate, but when someone starts insulting or questioning your understanding of the very topic you posted, it makes it quite hard to keep it civil! (Which is why certain buttons work wonders!)



The only insult was your reading of it, it was clarified a number of times that no insult was intended or implied. Perhaps that should have been noted while you protested and yelled (frequent exclamation marks, capitals etc are taken as "shouting" in most cases...) about what you misread in posts. For instance my asking for clarification of what you mean when you refer to "martial arts" as I found the OP to be too vague and lacking in detail, to have you respond "Did you read the OP? did it look like I put any details there!!"... uh, no, hence my asking for more details(?)...



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> I'd be more than happy to return to the topic originally discussed and hear other's opinions. But I don't tolerate disrepect and that's what happened in this case!



Point it out. Seriously, point it out.



Indie12 said:


> Agree/Disagree!! He certainly didn't show me any of that!!



You do realize that noone else can see any disrespect towards you, yeah?



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> And if everyone would please take another look at the initial topic, I did include 'IN YOUR OWN OPINION'!! Also, If you notice I left the topic broad for a number of reasons, they are ALOT of elements to this topic, therefore by making it detailed oriented, or specific oriented, it would take alot of space and debate just to get through all the little bits and pieces of them. That's why this topic was left broad, it made for a better discussion (until recently) where there was no set specifics or details, just an overall impression.



Er, yeah, hence the request for clarification... you know, to further conversation...

Oh, and if you're going to make such a big deal about putting "IN YOUR OPINION" there, how was my putting my opinion  down, which you misinterpreted and immediately responded with "Negative", then continued to miss what I was saying, telling me that I was talking about something I wasn't, how is that being respectful of my opinion? Hmm.



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> When he asked for specific details, I DID give him a brief rundown, although I must say that's not easy given the amount of materials for each section. But sometimes you just can't satisfy everyone and this was one of those times!



The vagaries you gave, basically  a stripped down version of the definitions I presented in my first post in this thread, is hardly you giving further details, hence my continued, and more specific request.



			
				Indie12 said:
			
		

> I'm all for having a great civic and good discussion, but when another party starts questioning one's intelligence or understanding of the topic they posted, or when another party brings up materials irrelevant to the current discussion, it makes it quite hard to have a civil and intelligent debate! Which is exactly the reason why I ceased the conversation, 1) it wasn't going anywhere, and didn't make much sense. 2) items were being brought into it which were irrelevant to the topic at hand. I've read the rules and regulations for this forum, one of them which states basically, there will no personal insults, attacks, or remarks (I dont' have the exact wording) but it seems to me that's what happened here, with the other party initating that part of the conversation. Sure I'm just as guilty for participating, but I'm also the one who ceased the conversation. I'm just saying, good conversations and discussions usually are done with disagreements and agreements, but not with insults or assumptions! And I've done quite a few discussions!!



You're hardly dealing with someone new to debate, online or otherwise, when it comes to myself or the other members here, you know. And can you please point out where asking about the parameters of your categories is not related to the thread? 

Honestly, you seem to have misunderstood, or misinterpreted the intent behind a comment, and gotten emotionally charged without present due cause, which has brought us to here. I know that you won't see this, but I'm kinda hoping that you're going to give in to that little "show post" button, and re-evaluate your actions and perception of my posts, as there really isn't anything that you're seeing. If not, there's not much hope for that apology, I suppose....

I'll leave it with you.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 25, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Quite a good question. I'd like to tackle it in pieces;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good points! By all means please feel free to put it on your MW!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 25, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> So I take it there's no apology? Oh, and as for "respectfully, productive and mature!!", I'd suggest no, personally. I don't consider accusations of stalking respectful, nor the lack of apology when the lack of base for such an accusation is pointed out, refusing to clarify what you're saying, trying to get things taken to PM when it's not needed, arbitrarily shutting down conversations because you don't understand what you're being asked, and then putting people on ignore rather than listen to them (or everyone else who say there was no personal attack nor any emotionally heated comments from my side) is hardly "productive", and as for "mature!!"? Nope, not really...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




:uhyeah:


----------



## Danny T (Dec 25, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> So I take it there's no apology? Oh, and as for "respectfully, productive and mature!!", I'd suggest no, personally. I don't consider accusations of stalking respectful, nor the lack of apology when the lack of base for such an accusation is pointed out, refusing to clarify what you're saying, trying to get things taken to PM when it's not needed, arbitrarily shutting down conversations because you don't understand what you're being asked, and then putting people on ignore rather than listen to them (or everyone else who say there was no personal attack nor any emotionally heated comments from my side) is hardly "productive", and as for "mature!!"? Nope, not really...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Quite unfortunate and disappointing.


----------



## Grenadier (Dec 27, 2011)

*Administrator's note: 

Thread closed.  If you wish to discuss the original topic, please do so in a new thread.  *

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator


----------

