# What MA cliches wind you up?



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


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


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

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


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





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



Bring a knife to a gun fight you should loose.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2015)

Ads in local newspapers or periodicals concerning Martial Arts schools -

_What makes our school different.._

Hell, ALL schools are different.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

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


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

Buka said:


> Ads in local newspapers or periodicals concerning Martial Arts schools -
> 
> _What makes our school different.._
> 
> Hell, ALL schools are different.


Great example


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2015)

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

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

Love their faith, though.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I don't take it to mean that.  I hear it and think do what needs to be done to stay safe worry about the consequences after your safe.
> 
> Here's what happens when you let thoughts other then your safety dictate your response.  This dude should have been dropped.
> Chased by Man With Knife Officers Don t Shoot Due to Recent Incidents - News - POLICE Magazine
> ...



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


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

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

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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


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


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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


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



Yes


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


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


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


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


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


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


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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


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


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


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


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


Okay


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Yes
> 
> I disagree I'm not ignorant of the law.  I understand the saying.  I have no problem with it
> 
> Setting then up for trouble how?  I don't Hear the sayings and think "oh boy I get to kill someone now"  I hear them and think. Do what you need to do to win


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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


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


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


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


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



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


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


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


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


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


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


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


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I've mentioned here before the "individual is more important than style" is a quote that's often repeated as a fact and I'd say just the opposite os true or at least it's up for debate.
> 
> My stance is that real encounters will involve an aggressive resisting opponent. Systems that train regularly with aggressive and resisting partners will best equip their students for reality. Sport systems are some of the best at giving students this type of training. Better yet a sport base with some self defense specific training. But systens that train dead patterns on compliant partners often espouse that they are training for reality and decry sport systems as a "game". The problem is these "street" systems are missing one key component, alive training with a resisting partner. Real opponents will resist you. If you're not training with resisting opponents you're not training realistically.


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


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


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




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


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


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


It may not be the worst advice but it's not good advice. I don't think people freeze in an attack because they're carefully considering the legal ramifications of their actions. I don't recommend anyone hesitate to react. I'm just saying going to prison shouldn't  be considered an option. Life in prison can be considered a fate worse than death for some, either way you're not much use to your family.

For example, I've trained in a class where the technique had you disarming an attacker, throwing him to the ground than stabbing the downed opponent. The technique might be appropriate on a battlefield but the scenario would have very limited situations where it could legally be applied to reality for most people. If someone walks up and sees you stabbing a downed opponent you're asking for trouble. This is the mentality some have when it comes to survive at all costs. Stabbing a downed opponent is not a good idea.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


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


I'll agree with you here


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> It may not be the worst advice but it's not good advice. I don't think people freeze in an attack because they're carefully considering the legal ramifications of their actions. I don't recommend anyone hesitate to react. I'm just saying going to prison shouldn't  be considered an option. Life in prison can be considered a fate worse than death for some, either way you're not much use to your family.
> 
> For example, I've trained in a class where the technique had you disarming an attacker, throwing him to the ground than stabbing the downed opponent. The technique might be appropriate on a battlefield but the scenario would have very limited situations where it could legally be applied to reality for most people. If someone walks up and sees you stabbing a downed opponent you're asking for trouble. This is the mentality some have when it comes to survive at all costs. Stabbing a downed opponent is not a good idea.


Except they do.  I just showed 2 trained police officers that started running away because they were considering the legal and worse the media response to a use of force.  The one officer said she had never been that frightened in her life and she was starting to get tired.  So yes if you start giving your students warning after warning after warning they will freeze.  You make them afraid they are going to jail of they do something wrong they won't do anything


----------



## Danny T (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


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


Agreed. This is one of the major problems I have with so called 'self-defense' programs. Most do not instruct self defense; they instruct fighting. There is far more to self defense than fighting.

Show me any style and I'll show you poor practitioners. It comes down to how the individual is trained and practices what was trained. I'll give that there are some styles that do what I feel is a better job of training individuals but within those styles there will be individuals who are poor and those who are good. It doesn't matter how long you are in a style or what style you are in. It is about how you, the individual, practices. The style doesn't practice the people, the individuals within the style practices.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> All martial artists teaching self defence should know the self defence laws where they are. It's acceptable here to knock someone out because that is reasonable force, kicking them in the head when they are out is not reasonable and therefore illegal, all students learning self defence should know things like that as pertains to them


I agree wholeheartedly with all of this. The reason I personally dislike the phrase is because 9 out of 10 times when I hear it, it's to justify an action like kicking them in the head unfortunately


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Stabbing a downed opponent is not a good idea.


If your students are not smart enough  to know "judged by 12 then carried by 6" isn't permission to murder someone you shouldn't allow them in your school in the first place.  If you don't know the difference between self defense and murder then a cliche isn't going to make much difference


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with all of this. The reason I personally dislike the phrase is because 9 out of 10 times when I hear it, it's to justify an action like kicking them in the head unfortunately


I've never heard it to justify anything like that


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> It may not be the worst advice but it's not good advice. I don't think people freeze in an attack because they're carefully considering the legal ramifications of their actions. I don't recommend anyone hesitate to react. I'm just saying going to prison shouldn't  be considered an option. Life in prison can be considered a fate worse than death for some, either way you're not much use to your family.
> 
> For example, I've trained in a class where the technique had you disarming an attacker, throwing him to the ground than stabbing the downed opponent. The technique might be appropriate on a battlefield but the scenario would have very limited situations where it could legally be applied to reality for most people. If someone walks up and sees you stabbing a downed opponent you're asking for trouble. This is the mentality some have when it comes to survive at all costs. Stabbing a downed opponent is not a good idea.




I have seen people freeze in an attack and when asked afterwards they said they were worried about being 'done' because they hurt them to much. It hampers people, that little worm in the head that says 'be careful you might kill them', most people have it, it's a good thing...usually as it stops us being more violent than we are BUT when push comes to shove it does hamper people.

No one is saying that one should stab your attacker, I can't imagine why you think that. On the subject of stabbing someone on the battlefield I can assure you that doing that will more likely get you sent to prison than stabbing an attacker on the street, cases in the US and here have proved that I'm afraid.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I've never heard it to justify anything like that


Well I have


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> If your students are not smart enough  to know "judged by 12 then carried by 6" isn't permission to murder someone you shouldn't allow them in your school in the first place.  If you don't know the difference between self defense and murder then a cliche isn't going to make much difference


As Reeksta said the saying often accompanied a brutal technique filled with overkill. Instructors like these techniques because they seem to be cows pleasers. People like to feel deadly and invincible. The quote in question typically accompanies this and Is provided as justification. That's my problem.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with all of this. The reason I personally dislike the phrase is because 9 out of 10 times when I hear it, it's to justify an action like kicking them in the head unfortunately




I've never heard it used to justify that either, the instructors including police and military ones I've heard use the phrase to convey that one should defend yourself vigorously with reasonable force which means _you can use what means you have to but no more_ and 'no more' means *not* kicking them in the head when down.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> As Reeksta said the saying often accompanied a brutal technique filled with overkill. Instructors like these techniques because they seem to be cows pleasers. People like to feel deadly and invincible. The quote in question typically accompanies this and Is provided as justification. That's my problem.




I would suggest then that these instructors are very poor and so likely to provide poor instruction as they are clearly not teaching proper self defence techniques if they have to exhort their students to overkill.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> you can use what means you have to but no more


Strikes me that this would be a more sensible phrase to use and one less open to misinterpretation


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Strikes me that this would be a more sensible phrase to use and one less open to misinterpretation



I'd hope that any instructor teaching self defence is also discussing more than just techniques so that the students know exactly where they stand. The 'better to be judged' cliché is a cliché because it is easy to remember, it's catchy, it sticks in the mind ( which is probably as much as anything why it is annoying) which in the end serves as a reminder that you really should try to survive an attack! Human beings can cope with anything even prison, concentration camps, torture, abuse all sorts but they have to be alive, that's the important thing...being alive, that's what the cliché is there for to remind them to stay alive.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> As Reeksta said the saying often accompanied a brutal technique filled with overkill. Instructors like these techniques because they seem to be cows pleasers. People like to feel deadly and invincible. The quote in question typically accompanies this and Is provided as justification. That's my problem.


I dont know where you train but I have never had an instructor teach me anything to "please the crowd"  Also Ive never taught anyone to use over kill.
What "people like to feel deadly" ?
Ive heard this quote 1000s of times and NEVER in the situations you describe.  You may need to find better places to train


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Strikes me that this would be a more sensible phrase to use and one less open to misinterpretation


Seems its only being misinterpreted by a select few


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Seems its only being misinterpreted by a select few


My experience differs


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> My experience differs


And?  So that makes it ok to make up meanings in a phrase that are not there?


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> And?  So that makes it ok to make up meanings in a phrase that are not there?


That's not what I said is it. You stated that only a few people were misinterpreting this phrase. I replied that in my experience it is misinterpreted more widely than you suggest


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> That's not what I said is it. You stated that only a few people were misinterpreting this phrase. I replied that in my experience it is misinterpreted more widely than you suggest


Yeah the always popular and never accurate 9 out of 10


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Yeah the always popular and never accurate 9 out of 10


Again, not what I said but okay


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Yeah the always popular and never accurate 9 out of 10



No need to be crass. It's a stupid quote, it bothers me and at least one other here. It encourages "the survive at all costs" mindset which is ignorant of extenuating circumstances. The OP is about cliches that we don't care for. It's subjective.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> No need to be crass. It's a stupid quote, it bothers me and at least one other here. It encourages "the survive at all costs" mindset which is ignorant of extenuating circumstances. The OP is about cliches that we don't care for. It's subjective.



I think though it depends on what you think the clichés that you don't care for mean. Here we have different views on what they mean, perhaps if it meant something different from what you thought it did, it wouldn't annoy you ( or would if it didn't annoy you before lol)

If you don't believe in the 'survive at all costs' mind set would you advocate dying then as an alternative to surviving and perhaps breaking the law by doing so? I'm curious.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I've never heard it to justify anything like that


Well I have.


Tez3 said:


> I would suggest then that these instructors are very poor and so likely to provide poor instruction as they are clearly not teaching proper self defence techniques if they have to exhort their students to overkill.


Well it's common place. 



ballen0351 said:


> I dont know where you train but I have never had an instructor teach me anything to "please the crowd"  Also Ive never taught anyone to use over kill.
> What "people like to feel deadly" ?
> Ive heard this quote 1000s of times and NEVER in the situations you describe.  You may need to find better places to train


If you're not familiar with crowd pleaser techniques you're lucky. I've been to many seminars and seen a lot of crap.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> No need to be crass. It's a stupid quote, it bothers me and at least one other here. It encourages "the survive at all costs" mindset which is ignorant of extenuating circumstances. The OP is about cliches that we don't care for. It's subjective.


Not being crass those are his words not mine.  If you cant tell the difference between "survival at all costs" and murder you have bigger problems then not liking a little quote
I can tell your right now "Ill survive at all costs"


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> If you're not familiar with crowd pleaser techniques you're lucky. I've been to many seminars and seen a lot of crap.


go to better seminars


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Not being crass those are his words not mine.  If you cant tell the difference between "survival at all costs" and murder you have bigger problems then not liking a little quote
> I can tell your right now "Ill survive at all costs"


Those weren't my words at all as I already pointed out


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Those weren't my words at all as I already pointed out


Yeah they were


Reeksta said:


> The reason I personally dislike the phrase is because 9 out of 10 times when I hear it, it's to justify an action like kicking them in the head unfortunately


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Not being crass those are his words not mine.  If you cant tell the difference between "survival at all costs" and murder you have bigger problems then not liking a little quote
> I can tell your right now "Ill survive at all costs"


Sometimes the line is finer than you might think. I'll survive and I'll avoid prison.



ballen0351 said:


> go to better seminars


Okay.....


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I'll survive and I'll avoid prison..


You hope.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I think though it depends on what you think the clichés that you don't care for mean. Here we have different views on what they mean, perhaps if it meant something different from what you thought it did, it wouldn't annoy you ( or would if it didn't annoy you before lol)
> 
> If you don't believe in the 'survive at all costs' mind set would you advocate dying then as an alternative to surviving and perhaps breaking the law by doing so? I'm curious.



it is a kill at no cost that becomes an issue.

why stop an actual threat when you can stop a potential threat? I mean it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

actually this might be easier just to do the enter the dojo clip.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

Here we go.
Enter the Dojo


----------



## elder999 (Jan 3, 2015)

"





Mephisto said:


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


You can operate lawfully, and wind up in a courtroom. 
Oh, and "my hands are registered weapons."


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 3, 2015)

elder999 said:


> "
> You can operate lawfully, and wind up in a courtroom.
> Oh, and "my hands are registered weapons."


My feet are registered, but the bad guys always get my while I am taking my shoes off.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Seems its only being misinterpreted by a select few


Sorry -- but I've heard and come across it used way more to justify inappropriate and unjustifiable use of force than to suggest that you should only use reasonable force.  I've seen it used way too often to cut short and ignore any serious discussion of the legal realities and issues related to the use of force, as well.  It's a phrase I detest.  Personally, I'd rather avoid either option by understanding and teaching the legal issues, as well as the physical.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Sorry -- but I've heard and come across it used way more to justify inappropriate and unjustifiable use of force than to suggest that you should only use reasonable force.  I've seen it used way too often to cut short and ignore any serious discussion of the legal realities and issues related to the use of force, as well.  It's a phrase I detest.  Personally, I'd rather avoid either option by understanding and teaching the legal issues, as well as the physical.


Where?  Where have you ever heard someone do use unnecessary force then say that?  I hope if they did you took them in front of a jury of 12.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> it is a kill at no cost that becomes an issue.
> 
> why stop an actual threat when you can stop a potential threat? I mean it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
> 
> actually this might be easier just to do the enter the dojo clip.


Who said kill? That saying doesn't mean kill.  If all it costs to stop the threat is a few broken ribs then you give a few broken ribs.  If all it costs is a verbal threat you make the threat.  If all if cost to stop the threat to to kill the you kill.  No more no less.  You use the most force you need no more and no less.  

I find it a little odd all these "trained" martial artists can't tell the difference between self defense and murder or assault.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Where?  Where have you ever heard someone do use unnecessary force then say that?  I hope if they did you took them in front of a jury of 12.


Three people have now informed you that we've heard this particular phrase used inappropriately. Why are you so unwilling to accept this? Is it that inconceivable that other people have different experiences to your own?


----------



## Elbowgrease (Jan 3, 2015)

How about:
"After you train here, there will be no neighborhood where you won't be safe..."


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Three people have now informed you that we've heard this particular phrase used inappropriately. Why are you so unwilling to accept this? Is it that inconceivable that other people have different experiences to your own?


It inconceivable that you all are trained martial artists and can't tell the difference between self defense and committing a crime.  Your reading more into the phrase then is actually there.  Saying the phrase is equal it "stabbing a guy on the ground"  or killing someone just to kill them is silly and I'd hope you were mature enough to know the difference


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> It inconceivable that you all are trained martial artists and can't tell the difference between self defense and committing a crime.  Your reading more into the phrase then is actually there.  Saying the phrase is equal it "stabbing a guy on the ground"  or killing someone just to kill them is silly and I'd hope you were mature enough to know the difference


That's not what anyone's saying though. We're saying that we've consistently heard other people use it to justify what we consider inappropriate behaviour and as a result it's a phrase we dislike


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> That's not what anyone's saying though. We're saying that we've consistently heard other people use it to justify what we consider inappropriate behaviour and as a result it's a phrase we dislike


No that's what several of you have said.  Just like you didn't say 9 out of 10 either.  Are you actually reading what's posted?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Are there any martial arts cliches like this which annoy you?



- If you want to learn how to fight, go get yourself a gun.
- Training at home will build up yourself some bad habit.
- ...


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - If you want to learn how to fight, go get yourself a gun.
> 
> - ...


I've heard the  version of "if you wanna learn self defense get a gun."  
Similar


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> No that's what several of you have said.  Just like you didn't say 9 out of 10 either.  Are you actually reading what's posted?


None of us said that WE can't tell the difference between self defence and committing a crime. Seems like you're the one with reading comprehension issues


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> None of us said that WE can't tell the difference. Seems like you're the one with reading comprehension issues


Right it's just the 9 out of 10 "others" that don't get it.  Lol

So what it mean to you?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I've heard the  version of "if you wanna learn self defense get a gun."
> Similar




That tends not to get used over here lol.


----------



## Elbowgrease (Jan 3, 2015)

I can kind of see the sense in that. There are some people I've met with, in my opinion, entirely the wrong attitude. They want to get into martial arts for the wrong reasons. They think that in a month they will be invincible. Whatever. 
"If all you want to do is beat people up, go get a bat. It'll be cheaper and take a lot less time." 
That one doesn't wind me up so much as make me giggle.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> That tends not to get used over here lol.


Lol yeah I guess not.  I don't hear it often here but I have heard it.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Right it's just the 9 out of 10 "others" that don't get it. Lol
> 
> So what it mean to you?


What it means to me is irrelevant; it's how I have experienced it being used by others that's the reason myself and others dislike it. Surely that's apparent by now?


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> What it means to me is irrelevant; it's how I have experienced it being used by others that's the reason myself and others dislike it. Surely that's apparent by now?


Lol ok so I'll ask again.  What's it mean to you


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Lol ok so I'll ask again.  What's it mean to you


And you accuse me of not reading what's written lol


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> And you accuse me of not reading what's written lol


No I read it.  I was trying to giving you a chance to have a conversation on the topic but you guess that's not your goal here.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Where?  Where have you ever heard someone do use unnecessary force then say that?  I hope if they did you took them in front of a jury of 12.


Look around the forum; it crops up regularly.  I've ranted about it more than once, I know.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Look around the forum; it crops up regularly.  I've ranted about it more than once, I know.


So never in real life to justify real events.  Just loudmouth on the keys.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> No I read it.  I was trying to giving you a chance to have a conversation on the topic but you guess that's not your goal here.


I don't guess anything of the sort


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

How many of you have actually seen someone use excessive force then say it's justified because  "better tried by 12 then carried by 6"  if your basing your dislike over nonsence posted on the internet then well on my opinion that's a pretty silly reason.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Who said kill? That saying doesn't mean kill.  If all it costs to stop the threat is a few broken ribs then you give a few broken ribs.  If all it costs is a verbal threat you make the threat.  If all if cost to stop the threat to to kill the you kill.  No more no less.  You use the most force you need no more and no less.
> 
> I find it a little odd all these "trained" martial artists can't tell the difference between self defense and murder or assault.



You're definition says more than what's there. Perhaps you're reading into it too much. Trained martial artists aren't the ones I'm worried about, its martial arts "authorities" telling laymen that it's better to go to court than to die when teaching potentially lethal techniques.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I don't guess anything of the sort


Ok.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> You're definition says more than what's there. Perhaps you're reading into it too much. Trained martial artists aren't the ones I'm worried about, its martial arts "authorities" telling laymen that it's better to go to court than to die when teaching potentially lethal techniques.


Lol it is ALWAYS better to go to court then die.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Who said kill? That saying doesn't mean kill.  If all it costs to stop the threat is a few broken ribs then you give a few broken ribs.  If all it costs is a verbal threat you make the threat.  If all if cost to stop the threat to to kill the you kill.  No more no less.  You use the most force you need no more and no less.
> 
> I find it a little odd all these "trained" martial artists can't tell the difference between self defense and murder or assault.



it could certainly imply kill. Even you have said kill. 

and hey why take the risk. I mean it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> if your basing your dislike over nonsence posted on the internet then well on my opinion that's a pretty silly reason.


And I think it's perfectly valid. How about we just agree to disagree?


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> And I think it's perfectly valid. How avout we just agree to disagree?


I think it's not perfectly valid.  Feel free to agree to disagree anytime


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> It inconceivable that you all are trained martial artists and can't tell the difference between self defense and committing a crime.  Your reading more into the phrase then is actually there.  Saying the phrase is equal it "stabbing a guy on the ground"  or killing someone just to kill them is silly and I'd hope you were mature enough to know the difference



we can. Which is why the quote rubs people the wrong way. And you are making up assumptions here.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> it could certainly imply kill. Even you have said kill.


It doesn't "imply" anything.  And sadly sometimes you have no other choice but to kill.


> and hey why take the risk. I mean it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


Because it's not either/or.  There is more the 2 possible outcomes.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I think it's not perfectly valid.  Feel free to agree to disagree anytime


Pretty sure that's exactly what I suggested but thanks, that's what I'll do


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> It doesn't "imply" anything.  And sadly sometimes you have no other choice but to kill.
> 
> Because it's not either/or.  There is more the 2 possible outcomes.



it implies committing a crime rather than loosing a fight. It suggests that winning a fight justifies commiting a crime and it only gives you those two options.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> we can. Which is why the quote rubs people the wrong way. And you are making up assumptions here.


I'm not making up assumptions .  You have said 2 or 3 times already that you might as well kill them just in case.  

So I'll ask you have you ever seen someone use excessive force and then justify it with that quote.  Or is this another made up instance like 9 out of 10 use it to justify a kick to the head.  When in reality nobody's been kicked at all.  

I've actually killed in self defense.  It's not done lightly but I wouldn't hesitate to do it again of it was needed.  I've also defended myself plenty of times some with just verbal commans, some with OC spray, tasers, batons, kicks, punches, arm bars, wrist locks, throws and take downs, a flash light, even a big metal clipboard once.  So see there are lots of choices that don't involve killing.  All of which could land you in court depending on the situation.  You need to be smart enough to know where the line is and get as close to it as your justified in doing.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> it implies committing a crime rather than loosing a fight. It suggests that winning a fight justifies commiting a crime and it only gives you those two options.


No it doesnt.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I'm not making up assumptions .  You have said 2 or 3 times already that you might as well kill them just in case.
> 
> So I'll ask you have you ever seen someone use excessive force and then justify it with that quote.  Or is this another made up instance like 9 out of 10 use it to justify a kick to the head.  When in reality nobody's been kicked at all.
> 
> I've actually killed in self defense.  It's not done lightly but I wouldn't hesitate to do it again of it was needed.  I've also defended myself plenty of times some with just verbal commans, some with OC spray, tasers, batons, kicks, punches, arm bars, wrist locks, throws and take downs, a flash light, even a big metal clipboard once.  So see there are lots of choices that don't involve killing.  All of which could land you in court depending on the situation.  You need to be smart enough to know where the line is and get as close to it as your justified in doing.



yes i have heard people use that term to justify excessive force.

this is not about whether or not you have had to kill people. But whether or not that quote is crass.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> yes i have heard people use that term to justify excessive force.


And did you report it?



> But whether or not that quote is crass.


And it's not.....so now thats we settled that. moving right along.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> And it's not.....so now thats we settled that. moving right along


It's not in your opinion. At least 4 of us feel it is.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> No it doesnt.



ok then what do you think it means or implies?

where does it mention a third choice?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> And did you report it?
> 
> 
> And it's not.....so now thats we settled that. moving right along.



because kata?


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> It's not in your opinion. At least 4 of us feel it is.


Lol I thought you agreed to disagreed 

But according to you you know 9 people that use it out of 10.  So that's 9 people that agree with me so your still out numbered


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> ok then what do you think it means or implies?
> 
> where does it mention a third choice?


I've already said what it means.  Keep up bud.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> because kata?


It's a shame I'm in time out around here.  I'd like to tell you how I really fell but alas I'm not allowed


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> How many of you have actually seen someone use excessive force then say it's justified because  "better tried by 12 then carried by 6"  if your basing your dislike over nonsence posted on the internet then well on my opinion that's a pretty silly reason.


OK, actual use on the street?  No.

Use in training halls and seminars?  Way too often.

As a response to being called on a blatantly unjustified, illegal, and extreme response in a training setting or discussion?  Even more often.

In most cases, it's a bravado phrase.  It's used by someone who doesn't understand and isn't willing to accept that there are legal ramifications in a self defense setting.  Commonly, it's the guy who's going to start blasting in a situation they don't understand.  I tried to search up a few of the threads that it popped up in, but didn't have much luck.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I've already said what it means.  Keep up bud.



really. Because if I go back and find you have made more false assumptions.

you said there was a third choice. I haven't read a third choice in that quote. Show me where that it.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Lol I thought you agreed to disagreed
> 
> But according to you you know 9 people that use it out of 10.  So that's 9 people that agree with me so your still out numbered


I didn't say that. I said 9 out of 10 people I've heard use it misuse it. If you're gonna try to be facetious you'll have to be more intelligent than that. It would be nice if you could just accept that other people have opinions different to your own instead of being so needlessly rude and confrontational though


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> really. Because if I go back and find you have made more false assumptions.
> 
> you said there was a third choice. I haven't read a third choice in that quote. Show me where that it.


Plenty of choices actually not just 3.  Self defense options are almost endless.  
Also plenty of innocent folks have a case end up in front of a jury even when they have committed no crime.  We have a grand jury system where we present evidence to a jury and and rhey decide if there should be charges or not.  So innocent fully justified people find there actions judged all the time


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I didn't say that. I said 9 out of 10 people I've heard use it misuse it. If you're gonna try to be facetious you'll have to be more intelligent than that. It would be nice if you could just accept that other people have opinions different to your own instead of being so needlessly rude and confrontational though


We have an ignore button if you dislike my posts


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> OK, actual use on the street?  No.
> 
> Use in training halls and seminars?  Way too often.
> 
> ...


So guys being guys.  Or more importantly cops blowing off steam talking smack about stuff they know they would never really do.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> It's a shame I'm in time out around here.  I'd like to tell you how I really fell but alas I'm not allowed



well we could have discussed this without the grandstanding. That was your choice.

you are the one flipping out. Nobody else.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Plenty of choices actually not just 3.  Self defense options are almost endless.
> Also plenty of innocent folks have a case end up in front of a jury even when they have committed no crime.  We have a grand jury system where we present evidence to a jury and and rhey decide if there should be charges or not.  So innocent fully justified people find there actions judged all the time



in the quote not in everything else.

the quote gives you two choices.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> well we could have discussed this without the grandstanding. That was your choice.
> 
> you are the one flipping out. Nobody else.


I'm not flipping anything other then the Steelers just scored.  

You and you disrespectful shots at Kata and traditional Martial Arts are getting old however


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> in the quote not in everything else.
> 
> the quote gives you two choices.


Nope.  Sorry.  I can be judged by 12 and have committed no crimes.  You keep saying the choice is loose or commit a crime.  That's just not the case.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

And going to court as a defendant still sucks. Even if you are innocent.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I'd like to tell you how I really fell


Straight onto your sword judging by most of your posts on this thread lol


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Nope.  Sorry.  I can be judged by 12 and have committed no crimes.  You keep saying the choice is loose or commit a crime.  That's just not the case.



you can be carried by six when you are not dead. They just might like to carry you around. But it is a pretty left field interpretation of that quote.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> And going to court as a defendant still sucks. Even if you are innocent.


Youbdint need to go to court as a defendant either.  I can take your case to grand jury and you not even know.  Your not there and have no idea.  I get sealed grand jury indictments all the time.  I can also take you self-defense case to a grand jury present it and they can recommend no charges so your judged by 12 and never a defendant.  But we're getting a little to in depth now I to the legal system


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I'm not flipping anything other then the Steelers just scored.
> 
> You and you disrespectful shots at Kata and traditional Martial Arts are getting old however



the blanket "i am right thread closed" statements however never do.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Straight onto your sword judging by most of your posts on this thread lol


You can't find that ignore button huh?  We have a help section too you know to give you a hand.  9 out of 10 people find it useful


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> you can be carried by six when you are not dead. They just might like to carry you around. But it is a pretty left field interpretation of that quote.


True.  Just like your interpretation that might as well kill them why take the risk


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> You can't find that ignore button huh?  We have a help section too you know to give you a hand.  9 out of 10 people find it useful


Another zinger there lol


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Youbdint need to go to court as a defendant either.  I can take your case to grand jury and you not even know.  Your not there and have no idea.  I get sealed grand jury indictments all the time.  I can also take you self-defense case to a grand jury present it and they can recommend no charges so your judged by 12 and never a defendant.  But we're getting a little to in depth now I to the legal system



so it is better to be judged by 12 in a sealed grand jury indictments that recommends no charges than be carried around by your friends at a party or something.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

drop bear said:


> so it is better to be judged by 12 in a sealed grand jury indictments that recommends no charges than be carried around by your friends at a party or something.


Only in the summer


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Lol it is ALWAYS better to go to court then die.


Life in prison/ any time in prison or death? Not good options.


drop bear said:


> it implies committing a crime rather than loosing a fight. It suggests that winning a fight justifies commiting a crime and it only gives you those two options.


Exactly! It's sn oversimplification that implied only two very grave options, but there are more. Why some can't get this, I do not understand.


ballen0351 said:


> Plenty of choices actually not just 3.  Self defense options are almost endless.
> Also plenty of innocent folks have a case end up in front of a jury even when they have committed no crime.  We have a grand jury system where we present evidence to a jury and and rhey decide if there should be charges or not.  So innocent fully justified people find there actions judged all the time


Exactly there are more than two options. The quote in question relegates life altering situations to only two options, kill and face a jury or don't and die, there's more than that. If you obey the law court will be of less concern. Will you kill a man and tell the jury "better tried by 12 than carried by 6?" How far do you think that will get you? Better to look at the nuances of the situaton and act appropriately, thinking on your feet is necessary in reality. You can't eliminate all thought by distilling a conflict down to two options. Situations vary considerations must be taken. I don't suggest a person lay down and die rather than lawfully defend their life.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> So guys being guys.  Or more importantly cops blowing off steam talking smack about stuff they know they would never really do.


Actually, seldom from cops.  And when they do, it's usually very qualified in how they reach that statement.  At that point, yeah, it's certainly along the lines of "I'm doing what I have to in order to survive; getting tried beats being the guest of honor at a funeral."  But I hear too many people saying it while they're trying to justify their plan or idea to use extreme force with little or no justification.

I managed to dig up a few of the instances it came up:
Here
Here
Here

and here's even an instance where I used it....


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Life in prison/ any time in prison or death? Not good options.
> 
> Exactly! It's sn oversimplification that implied only two very grave options, but there are more. Why some can't get this, I do not understand.
> 
> Exactly there are more than two options. The quote in question relegates life altering situations to only two options, kill and face a jury or don't and die, there's more than that. If you obey the law court will be of less concern. Will you kill a man and tell the jury "better tried by 12 than carried by 6?" How far do you think that will get you? Better to look at the nuances of the situaton and act appropriately, thinking on your feet is necessary in reality. You can't eliminate all thought by distilling a conflict down to two options. Situations vary considerations must be taken. I don't suggest a person lay down and die rather than lawfully defend their life.


Dude its just a quick little saying to prove a point. It losses it's effectiveness of it takes you 45 min to recite it because you cover every possible option known to man.  If your not smart enough to realize life or death struggles are more complicated then 9 words well I'm sorry.  


PS I know MANY convicted murderers thay have done less than 6 years in prision.  So 6 years in prision vs death well not much of a choice.  My kids will still be kids in 6 years.  In fact I arrested a guy last week that was charged with accessory after the fact for murder in 2002 and did 18 months then convicted of murder in 2004 did 5 years and I arrested him for armed robbery last week.  So if it comes down to it I'll risk court


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Actually, seldom from cops.  And when they do, it's usually very qualified in how they reach that statement.  At that point, yeah, it's certainly along the lines of "I'm doing what I have to in order to survive; getting tried beats being the guest of honor at a funeral."  But I hear too many people saying it while they're trying to justify their plan or idea to use extreme force with little or no justification.
> 
> I managed to dig up a few of the instances it came up:
> Here
> ...


Except that saying has nothing to Do with justification for committing a crime.  If a few random folks are not smart enough to to know the difference  (and I suspect they do they are just selling wolf tickets on the internet) that doesn't make the statement flawed it makes the few posters on the internet wrong.  I've heard that quote for over a decade if not longer and it hasn't caused anyone I've ever know to kill anyone or use excessive force.  So a majority of folks seem to understand it.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Dude its just a quick little saying to prove a point. It losses it's effectiveness of it takes you 45 min to recite it because you cover every possible option known to man.  If your not smart enough to realize life or death struggles are more complicated then 9 words well I'm sorry.
> 
> 
> PS I know MANY convicted murderers thay have done less than 6 years in prision.  So 6 years in prision vs death well not much of a choice.  My kids will still be kids in 6 years.  In fact I arrested a guy last week that was charged with accessory after the fact for murder in 2002 and did 18 months then convicted of murder in 2004 did 5 years and I arrested him for armed robbery last week.  So if it comes down to it I'll risk court


Length of the saying doesn't matter, it's an oversimplication as has been mentioned. If it requires more explaining to make sense one way or the other it's an oversimplification. The point of this thread is to analyze common cliches and identify why we find them faulty. 

Are you really going to tell us 6 years in prison is no big deal? Given the choice,  I'd rather just avoid prison and live. That's an option too tbat thus cliche ignores. I'm surprised an Leo is so adamant about this. Your job as an Leo is worlds away from what applies to a regular person. Perhaps consider an alternate viewpoint? Prison is not a favorable option to death, there are more choices to the law abiding citizen who takes the time to train and educate himself. 



ballen0351 said:


> Except that saying has noting to Don with justification for committing a crime.  If a few random folks are not smart enough to to know the difference  (and I suspect they do they are just selling wolf tickets on the internet) that doesn't make the statement flawed it makes the few posters on the internet wrong.  I've heard that quote for over a decade if not longer and it hasn't caused anyone I've ever know to kill anyone or use excessive force.  So a majority of folks seem to understand it.


So you're appealing to tradition? "Well we've said it for so many years so it must be right." No, this thread is about questioning tradition and popular culture. It doesn't mAtter how many people say it, no one is beyond question. It doesn't matter how many people you know that share your opinion, this is a discussion about cliche which equates to tradition and common sayings and weather it makes sense when logic is applied.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Length of the saying doesn't matter, it's an oversimplication as has been mentioned. If it requires more explaining to make sense one way or the other it's an oversimplification. The point of this thread is to analyze common cliches and identify why we find them faulty..



It *is *an oversimplification. It's *not* faulty:

Faced with someone attempting to take your life, what would you do to prevent that?

Given that, and what it entails, would you rather be killed and have a funeral (carried by six) or arrested for saving your own life, tried for saving your own life, and sent to prison for saving your own life?

It's only an oversimplification to those who cannot imagine that those are the choices-but, very often, those are *the *choices. While I can understand the reaction of some to the way others have used it, the fact is that having made that choice, it's a statement I can agree with, a *rule* I can live by. Coupled with commons sense, and knowledge of use of force law, such a mindset forestalls some of the indecisiveness that occurs under circumstances like these.....

If someone is going to try to kill me-or do harm to me or my loved ones-I'd rather risk killing them, or risk _deciding_ to kill them, or risk "accidentally" killing them, than die. Risking that means risking being measured by the criminal justice system-no matter how justified I might feel myself to be, or actually be. 

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Sure it's a cliche-go ahead-hate it. Doesn't make it any less true, even for you, under the right circumstances.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2015)

A little over six hours ago I posted on a cliches in MA thread. Now there's seven pages bitching at each other about deadly force and such.

Dudes, c'mon, chill for Christ's sake.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 4, 2015)

elder999 said:


> It *is *an oversimplification. It's *not* faulty:
> 
> Faced with someone attempting to take your life, what would you do to prevent that?
> 
> ...


Like we said man, the quote in mention is often used in accompaniment to bs and irresponsible technique. If kill or be killed is truly your only lawful option the answer is obvious, it may often play out that way. But it's also common for a person to feel threatened and kill without the proper justification. Just because you think killing the other guy is your only option doesn't mean a jury will agree. The quote creates the illusion of only two options, this isn't always the case. A repeated mantra that isn't always true can be problematic for those who fail to analyze the mantra critically. 



Buka said:


> A little over six hours ago I posted on a cliches in MA thread. Now there's seven pages bitching at each other about deadly force and such.
> 
> Dudes, c'mon, chill for Christ's sake.



Well it's a discussion, if you don't like it why are you posting your bitchy reply? Leave the thread, or progress the conversation.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 4, 2015)

drop bear said:


> And going to court as a defendant still sucks. Even if you are innocent.


Lot of experience in that have you?


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Buka said:


> A little over six hours ago I posted on a cliches in MA thread. Now there's seven pages bitching at each other about deadly force and such.
> 
> Dudes, c'mon, chill for Christ's sake.


To be fair, it would be nice to get back on track and return to what this thread was supposed to be about, especially when we clearly have a situation where no-one is going to change anyone else's mind. It's frustrating though to be told that our opinion on what is ultimately a purely subjective matter (ie. that we dislike a certain phrase due to the ways we've heard it used in the past) is somehow wrong.
I can appreciate @ballen0351 feels that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the phrase and that any use of it outside of it's intended context is the fault of whoever is doing this rather than a fundamental fault of the saying. I am happy to accept that this is his opinion and move on but it would make me happy if he would extend me the same courtesy and attempt to empathise with my perspective


----------



## Buka (Jan 4, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Well it's a discussion, if you don't like it why are you posting your bitchy reply?



More of an irritable old bastard reply.  Just semantics, I suppose.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 4, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Length of the saying doesn't matter, it's an oversimplication as has been mentioned. If it requires more explaining to make sense one way or the other it's an oversimplification. The point of this thread is to analyze common cliches and identify why we find them faulty.


Makes perfect sense to most folks.  The length does matter that's what makes it a catch phrase used to prove a point.   


> Are you really going to tell us 6 years in prison is no big deal?


Compared to death yeah its no big deal


> Given the choice,  I'd rather just avoid prison and live.


So would everyone else


> That's an option too tbat thus cliche ignores. I'm surprised an Leo is so adamant about this. Your job as an Leo is worlds away from what applies to a regular person.


It doesn't ignore anything.  As a LEO I live by that motto.  Ill do whatever I need to do so I get home to my family


> Perhaps consider an alternate viewpoint?


I have and its incorrect


> Prison is not a favorable option to death


Are you insane so you would rather die then defend yourself and risk jail time?  You can be 100% justified and still end up in prison Innocent folks are sent to jail


> , there are more choices to the law abiding citizen who takes the time to train and educate himself.


True and that's your responsibility to do so.


> So you're appealing to tradition? "Well we've said it for so many years so it must be right." No, this thread is about questioning tradition and popular culture. It doesn't mAtter how many people say it, no one is beyond question. It doesn't matter how many people you know that share your opinion, this is a discussion about cliche which equates to tradition and common sayings and weather it makes sense when logic is applied.


Im not appealing to anything.  2+2=4 no matter how many times people get it wrong its always 4.  Just because a few unknown people on the internet flex their keyboard muscles and use the quote incorrectly doesn't change its meaning


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> To be fair, it would be nice to get back on track and return to what this thread was supposed to be about, especially when we clearly have a situation where no-one is going to change anyone else's mind. It's frustrating though to be told that our opinion on what is ultimately a purely subjective matter (ie. that we dislike a certain phrase due to the ways we've heard it used in the past) is somehow wrong.
> I can appreciate @ballen0351 feels that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the phrase and that any use of it outside of it's intended context is the fault of whoever is doing this rather than a fundamental fault of the saying. I am happy to accept that this is his opinion and move on but it would make me happy if he would extend me the same courtesy and attempt to empathise with my perspective


I didn't know my opinion matter so much to you.  Sorry I don't agree with your opinion so I don't need to hold it on the same level as mine.  Just how it works not everyone's opinions are equal.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I didn't know my opinion matter so much to you.  Sorry I don't agree with your opinion so I don't need to hold it on the same level as mine.  Just how it works not everyone's opinions are equal.


Apology accepted


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

I don't think it's just about people's opinions, it's about their experiences which if you question does set backs up. In my experience I haven't heard people use the 'better to be judged....' expression to mean that one should overstep the law. You can't argue with my experience, however much you disagree with my opinion. There's a need to separate experience from opinion.
In my experience and this has happened many times the phrase "you don't look like a martial artist" is usually meant as an insult rather than just an observation. The tones of doubt in the voice is the giveaway, and if you are turning up in civvies to a seminar or to teach somewhere and you get this from martial artists you know it isn't meant well. Doesn't wind me as much as just make me wonder about the questioners' acuity.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I don't think it's just about people's opinions, it's about their experiences which if you question does set backs up. In my experience I haven't heard people use the 'better to be judged....' expression to mean that one should overstep the law. You can't argue with my experience, however much you disagree with my opinion. There's a need to separate experience from opinion.
> In my experience and this has happened many times the phrase "you don't look like a martial artist" is usually meant as an insult rather than just an observation. The tones of doubt in the voice is the giveaway, and if you are turning up in civvies to a seminar or to teach somewhere and you get this from martial artists you know it isn't meant well. Doesn't wind me as much as just make me wonder about the questioners' acuity.


I completely agree with this and would merely point out that it should work both ways. Some of our experiences suggest one thing, some of our experiences suggest another. I don't believe anyone has been accused of lying on this thread and if anything I personally have said has implied this then I apologise


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I completely agree with this and would merely point out that it should work both ways. Some of our experiences suggest one thing, some of our experiences suggest another. I don't believe anyone has been accused of lying on this thread and if anything I personally have said has implied this then I apologise




I haven't accused anyone of lying!


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> In my experience and this has happened many times the phrase "you don't look like a martial artist" is usually meant as an insult rather than just an observation. .


I get that one a lot its usually followed with "your far to handsome, how do you keep your face so beautiful and train at the same time?"


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I haven't accused anyone of lying!


Please re-read


Reeksta said:


> I don't believe anyone has been accused of lying on this thread and if anything I personally have said has implied this then I apologise


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Please re-read



I can't imagine why you brought up 'lying' it was never mentioned nor implied so why mention it in answer to my post?


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> it's about their experiences which if you question does set backs up


This implied to me that you felt your experiences had been questioned. I merely wanted to assure you that I wasn't attempting to throw doubt on that


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> This implied to me that you felt your experiences had been questioned. I merely wanted to assure you that I wasn't attempting to throw doubt on that




Ok no worries, I was talking more generally than me, I tend to do that, try to rationalise what everyone is saying lol, just me.
I do though have some experiences that even I question  but this is not the place


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 4, 2015)

Well, another one that annoys me is the Bruce lee "be like water..." quote. It makes sense in principal, be fluid, change with the situation and adapt. The problem is the guys that have said it to me are out of shape, stiff as a board guys who think they're sharing some profound intellect with me. Often times guys quote Bruce lee as if his writings are biblical. The lee writings are a good resource but everyonr has read them. When people are trying to sound knowledgeable and an authority and assume I haven't read what they've read is what annoys me.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Well, another one that annoys me is the Bruce lee "be like water..." quote. It makes sense in principal, be fluid, change with the situation and adapt. The problem is the guys that have said it to me are out of shape, stiff as a board guys who think they're sharing some profound intellect with me. Often times guys quote Bruce lee as if his writings are biblical. The lee writings are a good resource but everyonr has read them. When people are trying to sound knowledgeable and an authority and assume I haven't read what they've read is what annoys me.


Haha know exactly where you're coming from with that one. One of my best mates is a JKD practitioner, great bloke but he spews out Bruce Lee quotes at every opportunity then looks at you as if he's expecting a round of applause lol


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Haha know exactly where you're coming from with that one. One of my best mates is a JKD practitioner, great bloke but he spews out Bruce Lee quotes at every opportunity then looks at you as if he's expecting a round of applause lol


Yeah, that's my point. It's not necessarily that I disagree with the quotes but this is old news. I was reading Bruce lee in middle/high school. It's funny to see adults with the same Bruce lee infatuation I had as a kid. Not to mention I'm a big believer in practice what you preach. Don't tell me to "be like water" when you move like molasses.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Haha know exactly where you're coming from with that one. One of my best mates is a JKD practitioner, great bloke but he spews out Bruce Lee quotes at every opportunity then looks at you as if he's expecting a round of applause lol




Play 'Bruce Lee' bingo, write a list of Bruce Lee sayings and tick them off when he uses one, shout out 'house' of course when you complete your list.
Btw this can be done for many situations, work meetings are a favourite, especially if a few of you play. write different phrases/clichés for each person, that come up in these meetings, we all know them... "blue sky thinking, level playing field'' etc etc tick off when you hear them, first to complete wins. If you have an instructor fond of using certain phrases it works there too.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Play 'Bruce Lee' bingo, write a list of Bruce Lee sayings and tick them off when he uses one, shout out 'house' of course when you complete your list.
> Btw this can be done for many situations, work meetings are a favourite, especially if a few of you play. write different phrases/clichés for each person, that come up in these meetings, we all know them... "blue sky thinking, level playing field'' etc etc tick off when you hear them, first to complete wins. If you have an instructor fond of using certain phrases it works there too.


Love it 
There's quite a few you hear fight commentators in boxing/kickboxing/MMA come out with too:
"These two are showing a lot of respect for each other" = these two are doing nothing.
"One punch could change everything" = this is a one-sided blowout but please keep watching.
Plus of course UFC commentator Mike Goldberg's favourite:
"He's so athletic and explosive" = he's Afro-Caribbean


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Love it
> There's quite a few you hear fight commentators in boxing/kickboxing/MMA come out with too:
> "These two are showing a lot of respect for each other" = these two are doing nothing.
> "One punch could change everything" = this is a one-sided blowout but please keep watching.
> ...




of course then it could be drinks instead of ticking the phrase off!

Commentators are a pain, in any sport. They don't seem to understand that you can actually see what they are talking about for yourself. I think they must train at a cliché factory!


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 4, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> of course then it could be drinks instead of ticking the phrase off!


My wife and I genuinely considered starting a drinking game whilst watching the London 2012 boxing where we would take a drink every time Richie Woodhall said the phrases "fast fists" or "punches in bunches". He must have trotted both of those out a dozen times per bout. Like you say, cliche factory


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Are there any martial arts cliches like this which annoy you?


1. If you don't move, I won't move. If you move, I'll ...
2. You can't get any useful information online. Go ask your Sifu/teacher/coach/Sensei/ ...
3. MA can mean different things for different people.
4.Training at home will build up your bad habit.
5. Self-defense is different from sport.
6. ...

1. With this kind of attitude, you will never be able to date any girl.
2. This imply that all MT forum members are either stupid, or not willing to share.
3. When we mix combat discussion with health, self-cultivation, inner peace, ... everything will become so abstract and meaningless.
4. Not doing anything at home is bad habit by itself.
5. Both are just "fist meets face". 
6. ...


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 4, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Well, another one that annoys me is the Bruce lee "be like water..." quote. It makes sense in principal, be fluid, change with the situation and adapt. The problem is the guys that have said it to me are out of shape, stiff as a board guys who think they're sharing some profound intellect with me. Often times guys quote Bruce lee as if his writings are biblical. The lee writings are a good resource but everyonr has read them. When people are trying to sound knowledgeable and an authority and assume I haven't read what they've read is what annoys me.


And, on the Bruce Lee theme... "Absorb what is useful..."


----------



## drop bear (Jan 4, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> My wife and I genuinely considered starting a drinking game whilst watching the London 2012 boxing where we would take a drink every time Richie Woodhall said the phrases "fast fists" or "punches in bunches". He must have trotted both of those out a dozen times per bout. Like you say, cliche factory



i like a good punches in bunches.

i have been known to throw out "hit them and don't let them hit you"


----------



## Buka (Jan 5, 2015)

If I was an announcer I'd say stuff like this - "He's trying to beat him to the punch, giving him his best shot, throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him! You have to take the title from the champ and even though styles make fights there's little style here, it's a real barn burner. Nobody's pulling punches tonight, they're giving their all until someone is down for the count. Come hell or high water, whoever plays their cards right will raise their hands at the end!"

Then I'd shoot myself, probably from the cheap seats.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 5, 2015)

In general, most of the clichés don't annoy me in and of themselves. Most of them have them have at least a grain of truth in them (unless they are some fantasy from the movies), which is how they became clichés in the first place.

What I sometimes find annoying is people who spout off the clichés without having the experience or thoughtfulness to understand them or understand their limitations.

The bit about "tried by 12 vs carried by 6" is just one example. I have no problem with an instructor who shows how to stay physically safe while staying on the right side of legality and morality and then adds "but in a worst case scenario where you have no better options, better tried by 12 than carried by 6." I do have a problem with people who jump straight to advocating drastic overkill and use the phrase to justify themselves in a macho manner. Like Reeksta, Mephisto, and jks9199, I've seen that happen _way_ too many times.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> In general, most of the clichés don't annoy me in and of themselves. Most of them have them have at least a grain of truth in them (unless they are some fantasy from the movies), which is how they became clichés in the first place.
> 
> What I sometimes find annoying is people who spout off the clichés without having the experience or thoughtfulness to understand them or understand their limitations.
> 
> The bit about "tried by 12 vs carried by 6" is just one example. I have no problem with an instructor who shows how to stay physically safe while staying on the right side of legality and morality and then adds "but in a worst case scenario where you have no better options, better tried by 12 than carried by 6." I do have a problem with people who jump straight to advocating drastic overkill and use the phrase to justify themselves in a macho manner. Like Reeksta, Mephisto, and jks9199, I've seen that happen _way_ too many times.


You have "seen it"  or you have heard guys on a gym trying to be a Macho bad dude saying it.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 5, 2015)

In a gym.......stupid phone


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 5, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> You have "seen it"  or you have heard guys on a gym trying to be a Macho bad dude saying it.



I have seen instructors teach overkill techniques and use it as a justification.
I have heard students in the gym trying to be a "macho bad dude" saying it.
I have heard guys who may not even train anything say it, sometime in relation to describing a new gun or knife they have just acquired.

If you have never heard it used inappropriately, then great! It means you've been exposed to fewer wannabee movie action heroes than I have.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 5, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> You have "seen it"  or you have heard guys on a gym trying to be a Macho bad dude saying it.



Yeah, I'll agree with that. Over here we call them "the big (male appendage) ***** brigade"


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I have seen instructors teach overkill techniques and use it as a justification.
> I have heard students in the gym trying to be a "macho bad dude" saying it.
> I have heard guys who may not even train anything say it, sometime in relation to describing a new gun or knife they have just acquired.
> 
> If you have never heard it used inappropriately, then great! It means you've been exposed to fewer wannabee movie action heroes than I have.


Well that's different.  Hearing people pretend they are amazing is different then actually seeing it.  I just read a post here about how everytime a certain poster touches someone's neck people are paralyzed.  Sometimes people are just clowns and spout nonsense


----------



## Elbowgrease (Jan 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> In general, most of the clichés don't annoy me in and of themselves. Most of them have them have at least a grain of truth in them (unless they are some fantasy from the movies), which is how they became clichés in the first place.
> 
> What I sometimes find annoying is people who spout off the clichés without having the experience or thoughtfulness to understand them or understand their limitations.



I agree.

Slightly different direction, but still on clichés and more into the general use of clichés without the experience or thoughtfulness, a friend liked to call it "bumper sticker-ology".


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 5, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> And, on the Bruce Lee theme... "Absorb what is useful..."


Yeah that's another common one. Of course it makes sense, but what is useful to some is not so much to others. It's a problem when you have guys that don't spar or fight determining what is and isn't useful. Id say it's even more so with weapons. You have guys who do nothing but compliant drills and flow drills determining what is useless. Not to mention that taken out of context the quote is pretty obvious. im sure very few people would train something they find useless. To my knowledge Bruce wasn't a fan of forms but I've heard guys quote this that train traditional forms.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Yeah that's another common one. Of course it makes sense, but what is useful to some is not so much to others. It's a problem when you have guys that don't spar or fight determining what is and isn't useful. Id say it's even more so with weapons. You have guys who do nothing but compliant drills and flow drills determining what is useless. Not to mention that taken out of context the quote is pretty obvious. im sure very few people would train something they find useless. To my knowledge Bruce wasn't a fan of forms but I've heard guys quote this that train traditional forms.




absorb everything. Apply what is useful?


----------



## cloud dancing (Jan 6, 2015)

Take out his eyes man!! Go for the eyes.Like sure.If you like PRISON FOOD.for the next 5-14 years. But it was in Bruce Lee's book man.dtuhh sure, then must be really good idea.After all he lived on raw blood with protein powder mixed in.really healthy diet.Oh include pictures of how the guy looks when you take out his eye{s}.
Tai-chi is just for health.sure it is.That's why Yang Cheng Fu was a champion in China,and why the dogs who tried to bite him had broken teeth.That's why some of the Hung Gar masters waited 10 years before teaching it to their students.Wanted to know if student could be TRUSTED.
Light shines,darkness leaves.Keep shining.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

cloud dancing said:


> Take out his eyes man!! Go for the eyes.Like sure.If you like PRISON FOOD.for the next 5-14 years. But it was in Bruce Lee's book man.dtuhh sure, then must be really good idea.After all he lived on raw blood with protein powder mixed in.really healthy diet.Oh include pictures of how the guy looks when you take out his eye{s}.
> Tai-chi is just for health.sure it is.That's why Yang Cheng Fu was a champion in China,and why the dogs who tried to bite him had broken teeth.That's why some of the Hung Gar masters waited 10 years before teaching it to their students.Wanted to know if student could be TRUSTED.
> Light shines,darkness leaves.Keep shining.


You flick him in the eye so he won't notice you grabbing his collar bone.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

My most hated saying is, "Do it slow, and it will come". No, it won't


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 6, 2015)

"I don`t need a weapon, I AM a weapon" Oh for frack`s sake...


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

drop bear said:


> absorb everything. Apply what is useful?


Lol, the absorb everything discard what is useless quote, or however it goes.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 6, 2015)

I need to find more colorful places to train I guess I never hear any of this stuff


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 6, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I need to find more colorful places to train I guess I never hear any of this stuff



Yeah, your training isn't complete until you've listened to the wannabee warrior sages reciting a litany of quotes that they really don't understand in an effort to sound both deep and badass.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

When you are creating a, "Margin For Error", I like to think of it as a margin for over-kill.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> When you are creating a, "Margin For Error", I like to think of it as a margin for over-kill.



Mmm, yeah. Not bad a philosophy that


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

How about this cliche "a true martial artist....." This one annoys me too. It's like the saying "a real woman/man...." It's pretty subjective and people use it to define what they value most in martial arts and they usually never follow that quote with anything martial related. If you train a martial arts system no matter how lame you're a martial artist, even Dillman is a martial artist in my book and I'm not a fan of his no touch ko by any means. You could parallel it to artistic painting, if you pick up a paintbrush and paint with passion who is to say you aren't an artist? Same for martial arts. A lot of guys get caught up in "warrior wisdom" it's lame. Some fat guy in a kimono with an "ivory" handled dragon sword on the wall doesn't get to decide who is a "true martial artist". A lot of these guys seem to think martial arts is solely about some deeply spiritual, meditative, lifestyle. It's BS! Some of it makes sense and sounds good but it's the same new age martial arts stuff that's been around since the 90s maybe longer.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> How about this cliche "a true martial artist....." This one annoys me too. It's like the saying "a real woman/man...." It's pretty subjective and people use it to define what they value most in martial arts and they usually never follow that quote with anything martial related. If you train a martial arts system no matter how lame you're a martial artist, even Dillman is a martial artist in my book and I'm not a fan of his no touch ko by any means. You could parallel it to artistic painting, if you pick up a paintbrush and paint with passion who is to say you aren't an artist? Same for martial arts. A lot of guys get caught up in "warrior wisdom" it's lame. Some fat guy in a kimono with an "ivory" handled dragon sword on the wall doesn't get to decide who is a "true martial artist". A lot of these guys seem to think martial arts is solely about some deeply spiritual, meditative, lifestyle. It's BS! Some of it makes sense and sounds good but it's the same new age martial arts stuff that's been around since the 90s maybe longer.


I beg to differ. A true martial artist is a person that actually trains. It isn't deep, but it is spiritual.


----------



## Steve (Jan 6, 2015)

"It's not a martial art; it's a martial sport."


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Steve said:


> "It's not a martial art; it's a martial sport."


There was a joke going around, calling a certain style, "The retarded neighbor kid of Martial Arts", I laughed, and then felt bad for laughing.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 6, 2015)

Cirdan said:


> "I don`t need a weapon, I AM a weapon" Oh for frack`s sake...


Actualy saw that one at a tournament in weapons competition one time.  The judges allowed it and I'll be darned but the guy placed in the top 3 that day.  I guess you just never know


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I beg to differ. A true martial artist is a person that actually trains. It isn't deep, but it is spiritual.


That's my point if you train, you're a martial artist. I think spiritual can be hard to define. Sometimes it has to do with dedication and perseverence which is agree applies to ma. Other times people relate spirituality to a more esoteric and abstract role.


Steve said:


> "It's not a martial art; it's a martial sport."


Yes, because being proficient at punching, kicking, and choking people out has nothing to do with self defense. Haha  I'm pretty sure I've seen someone attempt to say that here before.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> There was a joke going around, calling a certain style, "The retarded neighbor kid of Martial Arts", I laughed, and then felt bad for laughing.



Er, I don't get it


----------



## elder999 (Jan 6, 2015)

The biggest of the current martial arts cliche of all:

*90% of all fights go to the ground.*






In fact, I wouldn't even call it a cliche.

I'd call it a lie.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> That's my point if you train, you're a martial artist. I think spiritual can be hard to define. Sometimes it has to do with dedication and perseverence which is agree applies to ma. Other times people relate spirituality to a more esoteric and abstract role.
> 
> Yes, because being proficient at punching, kicking, and choking people out has nothing to do with self defense. Haha  I'm pretty sure I've seen someone attempt to say that here before.


Spirituality can be easily be defined as your will to live; so, anything that has a positive and empowering effect is spiritual. English speaking people use the term spirit, or good spirits, when referring to your attitude, but the root word is, "Spiritual".


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Spirituality can be easily be defined as your will to live; so, anything that has a positive and empowering effect is spiritual. English speaking people use the term spirit, or good spirits, when referring to your attitude, but the root word is, "Spiritual".



That is probably Whiskey fella


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> That is probably Whiskey fella


Pendleton's is a good spirit. It rarely makes me worship him at the porcelain alter.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Pendleton's is a good spirit. It rarely makes me worship him at the porcelain alter.



Well, don't do sprites these, just a few Starbucks. Damn that caffeine is evil


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Well, don't do sprites these, just a few Starbucks. Damn that caffeine is evil


I am supposed to be honoring a Starbucks boycott for some reason or another, I don't recall, but every time they announce the price of my double mocha, I re-affirm my boycott.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I am supposed to be honoring a Starbucks boycott for some reason or another, I don't recall, but every time they announce the price of my double mocha, I re-affirm my boycott.



So you're in caffeine anonymous then


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> So you're in caffeine anonymous then


No, I am an home brewer.


----------



## Steve (Jan 6, 2015)

elder999 said:


> The biggest of the current martial arts cliche of all:
> 
> *90% of all fights go to the ground.*
> 
> ...


Is it 91%?  I can never remember.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> No, I am an home brewer.



OMG, I am already drooling. Home grown coffee?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Steve said:


> Is it 91%?  I can never remember.


It might be higher. At least one person will slip and fall. Even if you let him get up, it went to the ground.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> OMG, I am already drooling. Home grown coffee?


Whoa! Slow down. It may say Seattle's Best, but we don't grow the stuff. I could hook you up with some wheat. LOL


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 6, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Whoa! Slow down. It may say Seattle's Best, but we don't grow the stuff. I could hook you up with some wheat. LOL



lOL


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

elder999 said:


> The biggest of the current martial arts cliche of all:
> 
> *90% of all fights go to the ground.*
> 
> ...



I referenced that quote earlier  when someone posted some bs statistics. It's been true that most fights go to the ground in my experience but I wouldn't cite it as fact (unlike some posters here....ballen...cough,cough). I imagine it would be hard to scientifically come up with that figure but it may be possible to come up with something reasonably realistic. You'd probably have to go with a random sampling of a large number of youtube videos, that might be reasonably realistic.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I referenced that quote earlier  when someone posted some bs statistics. It's been true that most fights go to the ground in my experience but I wouldn't cite it as fact (unlike some posters here....ballen...cough,cough). I imagine it would be hard to scientifically come up with that figure but it may be possible to come up with something reasonably realistic. You'd probably have to go with a random sampling of a large number of youtube videos, that might be reasonably realistic.


Don't hate bud just because I do it for real and you play at it in an oversize playpen


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Don't hate bud just because I do it for real and you play at it in an oversize playpen


You're right, that's exactly what I do! I play in an oversized playpen!


----------



## Steve (Jan 6, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Don't hate bud just because I do it for real and you play at it in an oversize playpen


I stayed at a holiday inn express.   


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 6, 2015)

the saying that gets me going is:

"But what if"


----------



## elder999 (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I referenced that quote earlier  when someone posted some bs statistics. It's been true that most fights go to the ground in my experience but I wouldn't cite it as fact (unlike some posters here....ballen...cough,cough). I imagine it would be hard to scientifically come up with that figure but it may be possible to come up with something reasonably realistic. You'd probably have to go with a random sampling of a large number of youtube videos, that might be reasonably realistic.



Only 42% of UFC fights go to ground. As for the infamous, and mythical "str33ts,"  well, sure-one could say that over 90% of those fights go to ground.

Usually, one person hits the ground, with the other one standing over them. Go figure.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 7, 2015)

"Aliveness"


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 7, 2015)

Cirdan said:


> "Aliveness"


Is aliveness a cliche? Either way it's an important and vital principal to include in your training. Real fight are "alive", I.e. You will get hit, and the attacks will be random. I see "alive" as the opposite of compliant basically. You need both methods to train but one should always be progressing toward aliveness.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 7, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Is aliveness a cliche? Either way it's an important and vital principal to include in your training. Real fight are "alive", I.e. You will get hit, and the attacks will be random. I see "alive" as the opposite of compliant basically. You need both methods to train but one should always be progressing toward aliveness.



I am already alive thank you very much.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

The opposite of compliant will be non-complaint, not 'aliveness' which is not really a word anyway because something is either alive or dead aren't they?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> The opposite of compliant will be non-complaint, not 'aliveness' which is not really a word anyway because something is either alive or dead aren't they?



Well... there is some debate about whether or not a virus actually qualifies as alive or not.

But on anything resembling a human scale, you are correct.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 7, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Well... there is some debate about whether or not a virus actually qualifies as alive or not.
> 
> But on anything resembling a human scale, you are correct.


look at you getting all medical


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 7, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> look at you getting all medical



That's how I roll...

The point being, of course, that there are an awful lot of things that seem pretty well black and white on the surface, but when you really look at them, there's an amazing amount of grey.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Well... there is some debate about whether or not a virus actually qualifies as alive or not.
> 
> But on anything resembling a human scale, you are correct.



I think though, the virus will prove either be to alive or it will be proved dead/not alive, you can't be a little bit alive or a little bit dead lol. It's really one or the other isn't it in this case, some things may be grey but not this.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I think though, the virus will prove either be to alive or it will be proved dead/not alive, you can't be a little bit alive or a little bit dead lol. It's really one or the other isn't it in this case, some things may be grey but not this.



Will it? We've been trying to decide for a long long time...

And I've had more than a few patients that can be accurately described as "mostly dead". How else would you describe a person who is brain dead? They may have a pulse, and most of their organ systems may still functioning. But they're "mostly dead".

With a simple form, like bacteria, life is fairly binary. With complex beings like people, "death" is a process, not a light switch. Yes, we do declare a "time of death", but that's arbitrary, and there is often still some life at some level, even if it's not sustainable.

That's sort of the thing about a cliche'... they seem to make sense, and they do, but only in a limited context, when you're very much in the "black and white" area.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Will it? We've been trying to decide for a long long time...
> 
> And I've had more than a few patients that can be accurately described as "mostly dead". How else would you describe a person who is brain dead? They may have a pulse, and most of their organ systems may still functioning. But they're "mostly dead".
> 
> ...




My point is though that people don't say well I'm a little bit alive nor do they say at a funeral about the chap in the coffin he's only a bit dead  when there is irrefutable proof of something, it can't be 'only a little bit'. Someone in the hospital can be dying, which is what it is unless they are actually really and truly dead, 'dying' would be the expression you use wouldn't it. You wouldn't say to the family 'well I'm sorry he's still a bit alive at the moment or he's only a bit dead'. There is a state of dying rather than being a bit dead or a bit alive.


----------



## Zero (Jan 7, 2015)

Steve said:


> Is it 91%?  I can never remember.


It's 100%.

Every guy I've fought has ended up on the ground (and some of those ended up under the ground).


----------



## elder999 (Jan 7, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Will it? We've been trying to decide for a long long time...
> 
> And I've had more than a few patients that can be accurately described as "mostly dead". How else would you describe a person who is brain dead? They may have a pulse, and most of their organ systems may still functioning. But they're "mostly dead".
> 
> ...




Is that 




or is it


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 7, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Is that
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Brilliant.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 7, 2015)

"resistant training"


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

Cliché or phrase that is annoying.......heard in sports competitions including Judo and TKD......"to medal". One doesn't medal, one wins a bloody medal. Argh. Medal is a noun, not a verb. When commentators say someone has medalled, you think 'what have they meddled in then"  Likewise 'to podium', again podium is a noun not a verb.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Cliché or phrase that is annoying.......heard in sports competitions including Judo and TKD......"to medal". One doesn't medal, one wins a bloody medal. Argh. Medal is a noun, not a verb. When commentators say someone has medalled, you think 'what have they meddled in then"  Likewise 'to podium', again podium is a noun not a verb.



Actually, Irene, the OED on my shelf says that "medal," or, more properly, _to medal_, has been an intransitive verb since at least 1979, possibly earlier.
Don't have the OED online, but here's the Oxford Dictionaries (not the same as the OED, but English (as in Great Britain) nonetheless) definition:


> *VERB (medals, medalling, medalled; US medals,medaling, medaled)*
> Back to top
> Win a medal in a sporting event:_they medalled in all the relay events_
> Decorate or honour with a medal:_the most medalled athlete in Britain_
> MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES



One of my pet peeves? Not accepting that language changes, and accepting those changes when they occur-rather than getting all exercised about it, with absolute language, and flaming mad smilies and all....

With ya on "podium," though.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Actually, Irene, the OED on my shelf says that "medal," or, more properly, _to medal_, has been an intransitive verb since at least 1979, possibly earlier.
> Don't have the OED online, but here's the Oxford Dictionaries (not the same as the OED, but English (as in Great Britain) nonetheless) definition:
> 
> 
> ...




It's an Americanism that has come over here...Meddling with nouns who s medalling now OxfordWords blog

Language changes aren't good when you can't understand what is being said......we have a beautiful language, new words do pop up all the time which is good, the mangling of words is not good and takes the language backwards not forwards.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> It's an Americanism that has come over here...Meddling with nouns who s medalling now OxfordWords blog
> 
> Language changes aren't good when you can't understand what is being said......we have a beautiful language, new words do pop up all the time which is good, the mangling of words is not good and takes the language backwards not forwards.



Language can't move backwards, any more than time can. 

From the blog you posted:



> A quick look at v*erbs in the OED that first appeared in the 20th century shows that around forty percent of them are conversions from nouns. *This century is likely to see another increase as we continue to coin terms for new technology.




Another Americanism for you:_ suck it up.



_
*Seriously.*
Again, from the blog you posted:



> I’ll give the last word to editor of the _OED _John Simpson who says *“Just recently I was quoted on the medal-as-a-verb debate as saying ‘Get used to it!’ That doesn’t sound quite like me – monitoring the language neutrally as the OED does. But the sentiment is right: if people are using the expression then it’s out there as part of the language of today (and we have records of the verb since way back in 1966 in America). Will it be around tomorrow? Probably, but we’ll have to wait and see for that.”*


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

No, I don't have to suck it up, I can ignore it as being clumsy and ugly which it is


----------



## Steve (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> It's an Americanism that has come over here...Meddling with nouns who s medalling now OxfordWords blog
> 
> Language changes aren't good when you can't understand what is being said......we have a beautiful language, new words do pop up all the time which is good, the mangling of words is not good and takes the language backwards not forwards.


 I always think it's hilarious when Brits presume to judge American English.  You guys kill the language with gusto.  Can't understand a word most of you say, the colloquialisms and slang terms are so egregious.  And don't even get started on the accents.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

'Je suis Charlie'.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Cliché or phrase that is annoying.......heard in sports competitions including Judo and TKD......"to medal". One doesn't medal, one wins a bloody medal. Argh. Medal is a noun, not a verb. When commentators say someone has medalled, you think 'what have they meddled in then"  Likewise 'to podium', again podium is a noun not a verb.


That is part of the problem, the are too many nouns and not enough verbs in karate. You should verb your stances to stancing.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> It's an Americanism that has come over here...Meddling with nouns who s medalling now OxfordWords blog
> 
> Language changes aren't good when you can't understand what is being said......we have a beautiful language, new words do pop up all the time which is good, the mangling of words is not good and takes the language backwards not forwards.


Language isn't supposed to limit communication, It is moving forward; you just don't like it.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

Viruses may not look or be alive, but they will get engaged by the electric charge your body provides; so, engagement is the big term, aliveness is the little term. I engage, dead looking pieces of aluminum to grow, like Chia Pets, all the time. I'm a fricken Frenkenstein.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 7, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Language isn't supposed to limit communication, It is moving forward; you *just don't like it*.




What gave you that idea? Was it that I said I didn't like it? Duh.
Apart from the fact it's not moving forward, it's getting lazy and mangled, children are growing up not knowing how to write English ( or American if you like) instead, it's text speak which some use on MT.
Relying on clichés is as bad, lack of imagination really.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 7, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> That is part of the problem, the are too many nouns and not enough verbs in karate. You should verb your stances to stancing.



Or  we could do as Irene's blog suggests, and  all _dialogue_ about how we _experience_ _verbing_ nouns.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> What gave you that idea? Was it that I said I didn't like it? Duh.
> Apart from the fact it's not moving forward, it's getting lazy and mangled, children are growing up not knowing how to write English ( or American if you like) instead, it's text speak which some use on MT.
> Relying on clichés is as bad, lack of imagination really.


I don't have a thesaurus on me, but I'm sure engagement and aliveness hang out together in there somewhere.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> No, I don't have to suck it up, I can ignore it as being clumsy and ugly which it is


That might be considered anti-social in some parts.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

I have heard that organelles were originally viruses that "learned" to work together. I dunno.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 7, 2015)

On the other hand, I just thought of this, it could be a, "what came first? The virus or the organelle".


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> On the other hand, I just thought of this, it could be a, "what came first? The virus or the organelle".



Is that like the "Chicken and the Egg"


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Languages are living things and believe me they can be taken backwards. Witness this from the UK, whereas most of us would say to a departing friend 'Bye bye, see you later' or something similar that can be understood, the youth ( and not always 'yoof') just says 'lateerz' and if that's not going backwards...
I love words and English so much so I'm at the moment arranging to do my Ph.D. on English language.  'Verbing' something adds nothing to the language except clumsiness, writers and others have always added new words to our vocabulary, interesting, descriptive and clever words but 'verbing' a noun adds nothing.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Languages are living things and believe me they can be taken backwards. Witness this from the UK, whereas most of us would say to a departing friend 'Bye bye, see you later' or something similar that can be understood, the youth ( and not always 'yoof') just says 'lateerz' and if that's not going backwards...
> I love words and English so much so I'm at the moment arranging to do my Ph.D. on English language.  'Verbing' something adds nothing to the language except clumsiness, writers and others have always added new words to our vocabulary, interesting, descriptive and clever words but 'verbing' a noun adds nothing.



Good luck with the studying.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Good luck with the studying.



It's for pleasure now I'm retired, when I went to uni before it was to get qualifications for work, it was okay but this time round it will be enjoyable.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Languages are living things and believe me they can be taken backwards. Witness this from the UK, whereas most of us would say to a departing friend 'Bye bye, see you later' or something similar that can be understood, the youth ( and not always 'yoof') just says 'lateerz' and if that's not going backwards...
> I love words and English so much so I'm at the moment arranging to do my Ph.D. on English language.  'Verbing' something adds nothing to the language except clumsiness, writers and others have always added new words to our vocabulary, interesting, descriptive and clever words but 'verbing' a noun adds nothing.


I always thought it added an, "ing".


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I always thought it added an, "ing".



Not always, sometimes it's 'ed'.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Not always, sometimes it's 'ed'.


So putting electricity to something that isn't alive so that it actually animates, does give it an aliveness. I'm not sure I want to get on the bandwagon of hating that word.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> So putting electricity to something that isn't alive so that it actually animates, does give it an aliveness. I'm not sure I want to get on the bandwagon of hating that word.




and that's got what to do with the price of fish or even my post you quoted?

I'd say get back to the OP but goodness knows what will come up next.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Languages are living things and believe me they can be taken backwards. Witness this from the UK, whereas most of us would say to a departing friend 'Bye bye, see you later' or something similar that can be understood, the youth ( and not always 'yoof') just says 'lateerz' and if that's not going backwards...
> I love words and English so much so I'm at the moment arranging to do my Ph.D. on English language.  'Verbing' something adds nothing to the language except clumsiness, writers and others have always added new words to our vocabulary, interesting, descriptive and clever words but 'verbing' a noun adds nothing.


Getting back to your example goodbye is short for God be with ye; so, saying goodbye would have irked some anglophile when that started happening.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Getting back to your example goodbye is short for God be with ye; so, saying goodbye would have irked some anglophile when that started happening.



Anglophile? really?  Can we just please get back to the OP?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> and that's got what to do with the price of fish or even my post you quoted?
> 
> I'd say get back to the OP but goodness knows what will come up next.


Aliveness was part of the OP.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)




----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


>


Selfie?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

This would be a selfie.


----------



## Steve (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Languages are living things and believe me they can be taken backwards. Witness this from the UK, whereas most of us would say to a departing friend 'Bye bye, see you later' or something similar that can be understood, the youth ( and not always 'yoof') just says 'lateerz' and if that's not going backwards...
> I love words and English so much so I'm at the moment arranging to do my Ph.D. on English language.  'Verbing' something adds nothing to the language except clumsiness, writers and others have always added new words to our vocabulary, interesting, descriptive and clever words but 'verbing' a noun adds nothing.


I also love the English language, but I disagree completely that evolution of the language is good or bad.  It just is.  From Beowulf to the Canterbury Tales to the works of Shakespeare, English has been evolving constantly since forever. The idea that it can go forward or backward is an arbitrary and unhelpful judgement. It simply evolves. I think getting hung up on "verbing" is a little ridiculous.  If it was good enough for Bill Shakespeare, surely it's good enough for me. 

I do agree that people should learn to write well, understanding the rules of grammar.  However, in addition to being able to communicate formally, written communication has become largely informal.  I don't talk to my friends the same way I talk to my peers at work.  My language with my family is much more informal than my language in a professional environment.  Similarly, when I write a post here, it is informal communication.  And a text message or tweet is even more informal.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> This would be a selfie.


 here's me...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)




----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


>


What does my neck have to do with anything?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> What does my neck have to do with anything?




Really, you don't know why people are posting pictures of pencils everywhere? what they do is dangerous. Je suis Charlie.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Really, you don't know why people are posting pictures of pencils everywhere? what they do is dangerous. Je suis Charlie.


Jay nay parly pass Frances, I'm afraid. Hook me up...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Jay nay parly pass Frances, I'm afraid. Hook me up...




No, look it up.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

I am fine with not knowing. If I haven't seen it on Facebook it must not be that important.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Plus I am not smart enough to look up a picture; so, I have to be fine not knowing...


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 8, 2015)

I assume Tez is referencing the attack on Charlie Hebdo. I haven't seen other people posting pencils in solidarity yet, but I imagine it will roll around to my Facebook feed eventually.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2015)

Cliché...the pen is mightier than the sword..........only it's true.

I expect to some 13 deaths and the threat of the end of freedom of speech everywhere is not important. That's not political by the way.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Shakespeare actually taught me how write properly, well close to. The English language can be a nightmare with local dialects and such like. I would invite anybody to go to a Glaswegian pub and think you know English


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Cliché...the pen is mightier than the sword..........only it's true.
> 
> I expect to some 13 deaths and the threat of the end of freedom of speech everywhere is not important. That's not political by the way.



Yes and I hope the French, well actually they will dispense proper justice.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Cliché...the pen is mightier than the sword..........only it's true.
> 
> I expect to some 13 deaths and the threat of the end of freedom of speech everywhere is not important. That's not political by the way.


Clever, how you did that, there.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Clever, how you did that, there.



By non politically stating that a few scumbags are managing to de stabilize free speech and the right to choose ones faith, etc. That ain't political either, just the truth.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> By non politically stating that a few scumbags are managing to de stabilize free speech and the right to choose ones faith, etc. That ain't political either, just the truth.


I was sort of focused on the pencil, and fell into a trap. I am not doubting your sentiment.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I was sort of focused on the pencil, and fell into a trap. I am not doubting your sentiment.



Hey, no trap man, just a viewpoint.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Hey, no trap man, just a viewpoint.


Actually it was. But you would have to read though it again to see it.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Actually it was. But you would have to read though it again to see it.



Oh well, subtle I do not do. I would imagine then that some was around. Give me a Sledgehammer any day. I use a Fountain pen


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Oh well, subtle I do not do. I would imagine then that some was around. Give me a Sledgehammer any day. I use a Fountain pen


Ok, I am supposed to feel shame for not knowing that symbol, when it was the first time I had seen it, but I tend to forgive myself in these cases.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 8, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Ok, I am supposed to feel shame for not knowing that symbol, when it was the first time I had seen it, but I tend to forgive myself in these cases.



Shame, don't be daft


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 8, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Shame, don't be daft


Unfair is another term I am thinking of.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 8, 2015)

Can we return to the topic of MA cliches, please, before the Mod Hammer gets dropped on toes?


----------



## Zero (Jan 9, 2015)

Can I just say, with the risk of said hammer dropping on my noggin, that despite all this backing and forwarding on how lovely it is for the English language to evolve and develop, the most appalling phrase I think I have ever heard, and unfortunately am hearing it on a daily and regular basis in London is the:
"isn't it" ...(with or without a "?") ...or perhaps, "in'it"
And this is not used in the context of questions such as "that big fish over there is rather scary, isn't it?" but rather:
"I heard Johnny got locked up the other night, isn't it?"; or
Let's go see Kayleen tonight, in'it?"

To be honest, I have no idea quite what this is meant to mean or if it is even being phrased as a question half the time.

Do you get this in the States these days? 

Does this grate on anyone else?  I have no issue with slang in general in context but the use of this phrase seems to indicate a complete lack of education and grammatical comprehension. Sorry! Maybe it's just me falling into some elitist camp, in'it, but it makes me sick  : )

To continue this ramble and rant, I heard my nanny, who is actually a very clever bird but not with English as her first language, saying this the other day and had to (nicely, 'coz I'm such a darn nice bloke) explain to her why this was wrong, what should instead be said, and please to never speak like this in front of my kids as I want them to get into a decent school and have some kind of job prospect. What an elitist **** I must be.

...Hammer time


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 9, 2015)

Zero said:


> Can I just say, with the risk of said hammer dropping on my noggin, that despite all this backing and forwarding on how lovely it is for the English language to evolve and develop, the most appalling phrase I think I have ever heard, and unfortunately am hearing it on a daily and regular basis in London is the:
> "isn't it" ...(with or without a "?") ...or perhaps, "in'it"
> And this is not used in the context of questions such as "that big fish over there is rather scary, isn't it?" but rather:
> "I heard Johnny got locked up the other night, isn't it?"; or
> ...


We just say, "Huh?", and answer back with, "I know, huh?" I don't like it, but that is what we do.


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2015)

Zero said:


> Can I just say, with the risk of said hammer dropping on my noggin, that despite all this backing and forwarding on how lovely it is for the English language to evolve and develop, the most appalling phrase I think I have ever heard, and unfortunately am hearing it on a daily and regular basis in London is the:
> "isn't it" ...(with or without a "?") ...or perhaps, "in'it"
> And this is not used in the context of questions such as "that big fish over there is rather scary, isn't it?" but rather:
> "I heard Johnny got locked up the other night, isn't it?"; or
> ...


something I've noticed that I will admit grates on me isn't so much a matter of diction as it is a speech patter.  It's becoming common for people, particularly young women I think, to raise the pitch of their voice at the end of a sentence.  The result is that every statement they utter sounds like a question. 

For what it's worth, spoken language, particularly with kids, is often a reaction to what is seen as the establishment.  And everything ebbs and flows.  I went to an urban high school in a very poor part of town.  You pretty much had to speak in a certain way in order to survive.  Sounding too well educated would get you into trouble.

Another common phenomenon in spoken language is that certain phrases start as jokes, and end up becoming habitual.  For example, there was a young beauty pageant contestant who was answering a question.  It went viral on YouTube.  One of the things she said was something like (paraphrasing), "And the Iraqi Americans and such as."  People began using the term "and such as" as a joke, and now I hear it from people whom I know are educated and articulate.  It just became habitual... and I'll admit it's common enought that it no longer even sounds wierd.

Fun fact regarding cliches, the cliche started out as a term in printing.  Back when printers would have to set up the page letter by letter (movable type presses), the process of printing was very time consuming.  As a way to save time, the printers would identify commonly used phrases and cast them as a single block of text.  So on a page, wherever that phrase turned up, they could just use the pre-formed block of letters. Saved them a lot of time.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 9, 2015)

How about we start a bitching about kids these days thread! Those pants! And the skateboards! Why do they have to play the music so loud? In my day we got spankings and everyone was perfect! This new generation just has no respect! And they don't talk right, using words like "cool" and "neato"!


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2015)

Whether we like it or not we are judged by the way we talk, if we can't string a sentence together properly in a job interview for example we won't get the job. 'In'it' annoys me as well, that was my point about 'lateerz'. It's sloppy and very little to do with language.

Yes, this does have a martial arts relevance, earlier on people were posting the many martial arts clichés there are, if you go along to a gym/school and the instructor is belting out all the old favourites you will judge him as being a pretty poor instructor or at least one along the lines of macho idiot one in Karate Kid. Would you stay to train with someone who told you with a straight face that his hands were registered as dangerous weapons?


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> How about we start a bitching about kids these days thread! Those pants! And the skateboards! Why do they have to play the music so loud? In my day we got spankings and everyone was perfect! This new generation just has no respect! And they don't talk right, using words like "cool" and "neato"!


Right on!  I totally dig where you're coming from, man!


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> How about we start a bitching about kids these days thread! Those pants! And the skateboards! Why do they have to play the music so loud? In my day we got spankings and everyone was perfect! This new generation just has no respect! And they don't talk right, using words like "cool" and "neato"!



It's not young people as such more the media that influences them and that's run by 'oldies'.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 9, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> How about we start a bitching about kids these days thread! Those pants! And the skateboards! Why do they have to play the music so loud? In my day we got spankings and everyone was perfect! This new generation just has no respect! And they don't talk right, using words like "cool" and "neato"!



Smashing idea that


----------



## Buka (Jan 9, 2015)

Cyborg version


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 9, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Whether we like it or not we are judged by the way we talk, if we can't string a sentence together properly in a job interview for example we won't get the job. 'In'it' annoys me as well, that was my point about 'lateerz'. It's sloppy and very little to do with language.
> 
> Yes, this does have a martial arts relevance, earlier on people were posting the many martial arts clichés there are, if you go along to a gym/school and the instructor is belting out all the old favourites you will judge him as being a pretty poor instructor or at least one along the lines of macho idiot one in Karate Kid. Would you stay to train with someone who told you with a straight face that his hands were registered as dangerous weapons?


That was actually a law in California.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 9, 2015)

Buka said:


> Cyborg version



Maybe a little more Borg  Nice design though!


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 9, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> That was actually a law in California.



Hey, you really would not to hear "yeah man, this #### chilling init" it is very annoying


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 9, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Can we return to the topic of MA cliches, please, before the Mod Hammer gets dropped on toes?


MA cliches - "All things are simple after one gets it."

The "3 body problem - trying to predict the positions of 3 moving objects A, B, C (with gravity among each other) at any particular time T (by giving initial positions, initial moving speed, and mass for all 3 objects)" is unsolvable in mathematics.

Three-body problem - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

- The dynamics of one body is pretty straight forward, in as much as it travels straight forward.
- The dynamics of two bodies, while not trivial, can be reduced by pretending that one body is sitting still, and then restricting all of your attention to the other body. ...
- But, for three bodies, there doesn’t seem to be a fancy trick for finding solutions.

Q What is the three body problem Ask a Mathematician Ask a Physicist

Your arms, your legs, your head, your body, your opponent's arms, his legs, his head, his body will all move in combat speed.

- When will your body part touch your opponent's body part?
- Which part of your body will touch which part of his body?
- What angle will contact be made?
- What force will contact be made?
- Will there be only contact point, or there many be many?
- What will your gravity center be able to affect the final contact?
- What will his gravity center be able to affect the final contact?
- ...

Trying to predict the position of those 12 body parts

- position,
- speed,

at "any particular time T" can be exponential more difficult than to solve the "3 body problem".


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 10, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Are there any martial arts cliches like this which annoy you?


"For self-defense, I don't have to train how to move in toward my opponent. If my opponent wants to attack me, he has to move in toward me."


----------



## elder999 (Jan 10, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> MA cliches - "All things are simple after one gets it."
> 
> The "3 body problem - trying to predict the positions of 3 moving objects A, B, C (with gravity among each other) at any particular time T (by giving initial positions, initial moving speed, and mass for all 3 objects)" is unsolvable in mathematics.
> 
> ...


It's  a delightful metaphor, but-*no.*

The three body problem is only unsolvable on the _quantum_ level.

 I can tell you, provided there are no outside forces like comets or asteroids involved to disrupt, precisely where the earth, moon and sun will be in relation to each other tomorrow, two months from now, two years from now, or a million years from now-using mathematics and based upon the criteria provided: position,mass and velocity. I can even estimate you where  they'll be in relation to each other _millions_ of years from now, based upon changes in gravity from the sun's loss of mass.add as many celestial spheres as you like-the entire solar system, or even far galaxies, and I can calculate the same 

Precisely the sort of data for which the problem is named, btw.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 10, 2015)

MA cliches:

 block you will bleed less


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 10, 2015)

tshadowchaser said:


> MA cliches:
> 
> block you will bleed less


But... That's true!



Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 10, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> But... That's true!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


I can argue any cliche' you want.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 10, 2015)

You cant kick high in a street fight.
ok yes if you cant kick. But otherwise if a shot is there take the thing. 

you cant go to the ground. In a street fight based on the idea that people run in from nowhere just to lay kicks on guys.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 10, 2015)

Martial arts clichés, thy name is Legion.

A few of my "favorites" include:

Any mention of "aliveness" training. 

Saying that "rank is meaningless," usually coupled with a bitter complaint about how some child just got promoted to black belt (or  higher dan rank). You can't have it both ways, people.

"That technique just doesn't work," after trying it maybe 3 times.

"My style got rid of all the extraneous/unneeded techniques," usually coupled with complaining about the "watering down" of martial arts and a complete lack of a sense of irony.

This one doesn't fit, exactly, but the use of faux "oriental" lettering on things such as a school's logo, rank certificates, or - perhaps worst of all - the embroidery on a black belt. Why? Do you think it's a requirement to have bad taste to be in martial arts?

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 11, 2015)

chrispillertkd said:


> Martial arts clichés, thy name is Legion.
> 
> A few of my "favorites" include:
> 
> ...


Who cares about the embroidery? It looks better than the bricks.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 12, 2015)

chrispillertkd said:


> Martial arts clichés, thy name is Legion.
> 
> A few of my "favorites" include:
> 
> ...


Lol, good points. I'm curious what you don't like about the term aliveness? Perhaps a better word could be developed but I think it's a good concept to describe effective training. Of course aliveness is only one component and an effective program IMO which needs a certain amount compliant or "dead" training also.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 12, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Lol, good points. I'm curious what you don't like about the term aliveness? Perhaps a better word could be developed but I think it's a good concept to describe effective training. Of course aliveness is only one component and an effective program IMO which needs a certain amount compliant or "dead" training also.


Exactly! Aliveness describes an infusion of attitude, plus some actual physical changes you can make to the program, such as, don't stand flat footed, keep you hands up, keep the foot forward you want forward. What is the replacement term?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 12, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Exactly! Aliveness describes an infusion of attitude, plus some actual physical changes you can make to the program, such as, don't stand flat footed, keep you hands up, keep the foot forward you want forward. What is the replacement term?



Alive training generally refers to resisted training.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Alive training generally refers to resisted training.


That's I context I use the term in. But I have heard it used to denote hand position, in Marc Tedeachi's book "Hapkido". But I think drop bear's definition is more common. Resistance training = alive, compliant training/drill = dead.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Alive training generally refers to resisted training.


The term "resisted" may not be enough. I will say alive training is someone who runs toward you with full speed and tried to knock your head off. In other words, your opponent tries to hurt you and not just resists against you.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The term "resisted" may not be enough. I will say alive training is* someone* *who runs toward you with full speed and tried to knock your head off*. In other words, your opponent tries to hurt you and not just resists against you.



My club knows that as 'training'


----------



## drop bear (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The term "resisted" may not be enough. I will say alive training is someone who runs toward you with full speed and tried to knock your head off. In other words, your opponent tries to hurt you and not just resists against you.



yeah that works. I use the term intent. So I could train alive or resisted but if i really want a piece of the guy it would be alive with intent.

but it is much of a muchness.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 12, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> My club knows that as 'training'


If you let your opponent runs toward you like this 100 times and see how many times that he can knock/take you down vs. how many times that you can knock/take him down, your "self-defense" training will become "sport" training.

Since "take down" is much safer than "knock down", grapplers have much safer environment to test their skill.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you let your opponent runs toward you like this 100 times and see how many times that he can knock/take you down vs. how many times that you can knock/take him down, your "self-defense" training will become "sport" training.
> 
> Since "take down" is much safer than "knock down", grapplers have much safer environment to test their skill.



Our students tend to test their skills on that other martial arts cliché 'the street', I said 'tend to', they actually *do* fight quite a bit, sometimes they start it, sometimes they are defending themselves and sometimes it's even sanctioned by authorities. They will knock each other down quite happily, and knock others down even more gleefully. I'm afraid they regard all fighting as a sport, they are aggressive though despite what it sounds like they are also very disciplined.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 12, 2015)

Every Sunday morning, there is an open mat that we have in my city (Austin, Tx). People just go there to test their skill against other MA styles. They then come back and discuss the experience that they had learned from there. IMO, it's an excellent idea.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you let your opponent runs toward you like this 100 times and see how many times that he can knock/take you down vs. how many times that you can knock/take him down, your "self-defense" training will become "sport" training.
> 
> Since "take down" is much safer than "knock down", grapplers have much safer environment to test their skill.



there is a happy medium there a bit. But as a rule of thumb if you are practicing a technique alive. You shouldn't be able to make it work all the time.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Every Sunday morning, there is an open mat that we have in my city (Austin, Tx). People just go there to test their skill against other MA styles. They then come back and discuss the experience that they had learned from there. IMO, it's an excellent idea.



we do one as well.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Every Sunday morning, there is an open mat that we have in my city (Austin, Tx). People just go there to test their skill against other MA styles. They then come back and discuss the experience that they had learned from there. IMO, it's an excellent idea.




Ours go out on Thursdays and weekend nights quite often ending up in fights.  They know whether their stuff works or not, usually it does.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> there is a happy medium there a bit. But as a rule of thumb if you are practicing a technique alive. You shouldn't be able to make it work all the time.


One of my favor training is my opponent holds a shield and runs toward me with full speed. I then try to stop his forward momentum with my kick.

If

- my kick can stop his forward momentum, I get a point.
- my opponent's forward momentum runs me backward, he get a point.

After 100 rounds of testing, I will get a final score. That score can tell me what's the chance that my kick can stop an aggressive attacker. I like to use the same pattern to test many different skills as well.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 12, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Ours go out on Thursdays and weekend nights quite often ending up in fights.



I was going to say that the cliche about MMA attracting thugs was an irritating cliche, but the fact that you find this habit of getting into illegal street fights something to be happy about has prevented me.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> I was going to say that the cliche about MMA attracting thugs was an irritating cliche, but the fact that you find this habit of getting into illegal street fights something to be happy about has prevented me.




The fights have nothing to do with MMA and all to do with the fact that the British infantry soldier is someone who has a talent for getting into fights, as I said before they are not always of their making, often civvies full of beer and bravado like to pick on them which will cause a fight. Often fights will break out among different regiments ( the regimental system means that soldiers are actually related to each other as much as they are brothers in arms metaphorically) and often they will fight among themselves. You have to think the old Western bar room brawl where they fight then drink together, this has been going on for _a thousand years or so_, it won't stop anytime soon. This in on the biggest Garrison in Europe we have thousands of soldiers, most battle proven and battle weary. The British soldier has always been a hard man, that doesn't change either. Remember the old wartime warning for GIs? don't drink, play cards of fight with the Tommies.......
Am I happy about it? No, I've had to break up to many fights to be happy but the truth is they know about 'aliveness' training than most martial arts instructors, the older soldiers know what it's like to stand facing riots in Northern Ireland, having bricks and Molotov cocktails thrown at you testing your nerve, others have faced situations in the Balkans, two Iraq wars and Afghanistan, they  know all about fighting both in the street and in a war. So when a civvie comes up to them full of vitriol and swinging at them you tell them not to punch his lights out because I'm not going to. Before people judge them, take a walk in their boots.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 12, 2015)

I am not judging them. I am judging your apparent attitude towards this behavior. I might have said the same thing about a group that gets into a lot of fights. I wouldn't have given any indication that I find this a good thing.  can pretty much only be interpreted as approval.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> I am not judging them. I am judging your apparent attitude towards this behavior. I might have said the same thing about a group that gets into a lot of fights. I wouldn't have given any indication that I find this a good thing.  can pretty much only be interpreted as approval.




Then you are completely wrong , at not time did I say I approved and I can see nothing in my posts that indicates I approve. Where did I say this was a good thing, I said that they are well trained in fighting in the streets after a comment that a certain type of training was actually turning into sport training. I was pointing out that our students consider fighting to be a sport anyway, there was no approval there. I was also pointing out that to them 'aliveness' training is actually going out and fighting. I think you are seeing what you want to see in my post which is, as always disapproval of me.   If you cannot take a tongue in check comment as being exactly that ...hence the smiley face...then I'm afraid I can only assume you are making a personal attack on me. You certainly have no right to judge me....again.


----------



## Steve (Jan 12, 2015)

I think this is a simple misunderstanding, and I appreciate that Tez3 clarified her intent.  She wasn't condoning the fighting, DD.  The art of the emoticon is subtle but rife with danger.

Regarding the topic at hand, at least within a given ecosystem, Tez3 describes the fundamental difference between training alone and training coupled with real world experience.   Does anyone here doubt that the guys Tez3 refers to know more about real world violence than a 30+ year martial arts "expert" who has little to no experience?  If I wanted to learn how to handle myself in a dicey situation, the guy who stood "facing riots in Northern Ireland, having bricks and Molotov cocktails thrown at you testing your nerve" is a guy who has something to share.  Not saying this is the ONLY experience that is relevant, but it sure highlights IMO the stark difference between a martial arts expert and an expert in real world, violent encounters.

Seems like a no brainer to me.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 12, 2015)

Our guys eat a ban if they are out and being duchebags.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 13, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Our guys eat a ban if they are out and being duchebags.




yeah how dare our soldiers be on the street eh?
Murder of Lee Rigby - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

BBC NEWS UK Scotland Glasgow and West Man jailed over soldier s murder


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 13, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Our guys eat a ban if they are out and being duchebags.





"It burns with a white rage against societies as a whole, from military leaders and chiefs of state to (more common in our time) comfortable civilians in easy chairs, who send *rough men* out to serve their interests brutally, murderously (what is war?), and then—when circumstances change and in the exquisite safety and fastidiousness of their living rooms they *suddenly find these rough men’s actions repugnant—disown them."  *Richard Grenier


----------



## drop bear (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> yeah how dare our soldiers be on the street eh?
> Murder of Lee Rigby - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> BBC NEWS UK Scotland Glasgow and West Man jailed over soldier s murder



So our guys shouldn't get a ban for being duchebags?


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> yeah how dare our soldiers be on the street eh?
> 
> You may want to go back and reread what drop bear wrote.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 13, 2015)

No, I may not want to in the least. He may well want to reread what I said about the soldiers being the target of beered up, machismo fuelled idiots who like to pick on soldiers to show how 'hard they are. He might like to understand too as I'm sure you do that if the soldiers *cause* trouble they are indeed disciplined but then those 'douchebags' as he calls them do many things so he doesn't have to.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 13, 2015)

If what he said doesn't apply no reason to get worked up about it. But if you're going to act as if what drop bear said applies to every soldier without exception then that's on you. You've reacted the same way to people ever since I've been on MT so I suppose you changing now would be unlikely. Have a day.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## drop bear (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> No, I may not want to in the least. He may well want to reread what I said about the soldiers being the target of beered up, machismo fuelled idiots who like to pick on soldiers to show how 'hard they are. He might like to understand too as I'm sure you do that if the soldiers *cause* trouble they are indeed disciplined but then those 'douchebags' as he calls them do many things so he doesn't have to.



I am lost.Are you defending violent behavior or condemning it.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> No, I may not want to in the least. He may well want to reread what I said about the soldiers being the target of beered up, machismo fuelled idiots who like to pick on soldiers to show how 'hard they are. He might like to understand too as I'm sure you do that if the soldiers *cause* trouble they are indeed disciplined but then those 'douchebags' as he calls them do many things so he doesn't have to.


I think what started this whole thing was your casual mention about your students getting in frequent brawls. You may have said it in a tongue in cheek manner but that is something many take seriously. Initially you didn't mention your guys were military and you seemed to refer to street brawls rather than combat experience. Rather than being so uptight and defensive you could have just explained yourself in a less confrontational way. If that's the military culture where you're at, fine just say so. No need to take everything as a personal insult. People can question what you say without personally attacking you, name calling and questioning your intelligence are personal attacks this was not the case here. Initially you came off as an instructor that approves of students that frequently start and get into street fights. I'm sure/I'd hope that you don't teach people of poor moral character. Young guys fighting will happen it's no big deal but it's also nothing to be proud of, you were just joking around that's it.

On a side note, I had a student involved in a domestic violence case. That was it, he's done. I don't teach assholes. Hopefully other instructors do they same.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 13, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I think what started this whole thing was your casual mention about your students getting in frequent brawls. You may have said it in a tongue in cheek manner but that is something many take seriously. Initially you didn't mention your guys were military and you seemed to refer to street brawls rather than combat experience. Rather than being so uptight and defensive you could have just explained yourself in a less confrontational way. If that's the military culture where you're at, fine just say so. No need to take everything as a personal insult. People can question what you say without personally attacking you, name calling and questioning your intelligence are personal attacks this was not the case here. Initially you came off as an instructor that approves of students that frequently start and get into street fights. I'm sure/I'd hope that you don't teach people of poor moral character. Young guys fighting will happen it's no big deal but it's also nothing to be proud of, you were just joking around that's it.
> 
> On a side note, I had a student involved in a domestic violence case. That was it, he's done. I don't teach assholes. Hopefully other instructors do they same.




Really, another person who wants to lecture me oh goody, another personal attack on me. Oh and I was talking about street brawls and no I'm not the instructor.  I wasn't taking it as a personal insult, I never ever take anything on here personally because to do so would mean I actually cared what people said. I'm not in the least uptight nor defensive, you are reading way too much into my posts.
Poor moral character? Really? yes I can imagine many think that of soldiers.


----------



## Steve (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3, instead of completely derailing the thread, can you consider just letting it go?  You explained yourself and that was great.   I, for one, can completely understand how a tongue in cheek comment can be misunderstood.  But the posts since then have been very aggressive and off topic.

I don't think anyone is intending to attack you in exactly the same way that I don't think you were intending to condone wanton violence or street brawls.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 13, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Really, another person who wants to lecture me oh goody, another personal attack on me. Oh and I was talking about street brawls and no I'm not the instructor.  I wasn't taking it as a personal insult, I never ever take anything on here personally because to do so would mean I actually cared what people said. I'm not in the least uptight nor defensive, you are reading way too much into my posts.
> Poor moral character? Really? yes I can imagine many think that of soldiers.


Nice. Attack his patriotism. You go girl.


----------



## Grenadier (Jan 13, 2015)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

Please keep this conversation civil, and on-topic.  

-Ronald Shin
-MT Administrator


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

Perhaps you have to have had a beer with the british soldiers to really appreciate them. Yes they are rough and foul mouthed, but they really are the good guys. And from what I have seen they are diciplined _quite_ harshly if they misbehave too badly. 
(those brit army police know how to use a baton, jeeez!)


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I am lost.Are you defending violent behavior or condemning it.



You talking about Lee Rigby?


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

I am just talking about the british boys stationed at Bardufoss in northern Norway.
A decade ago but I still have fond memories of those guys 

A conversation with one of them comes to mind: "Hey bloke, how do you say "_Fook in the arsh"_ in Norwegian?" That kind of sums up their character haha  Got to love them.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 14, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> You talking about Lee Rigby?



No. I have no idea who he is.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

More cliches that makes me go 

-Martial arts make kids violent.
-Martial artists can suddenly fly off the handle in a blur of strikes while yelling WHAIIIIIIIII!!!!
-Old martial artists are soooo wise in the ways of the world.
-Secret underground to the death MA tournaments.
-Martial artist spar full contact with lethal techniques and real sharp weapons all the time.
-All martial artists are acrobats who can do a double screw somersault with ease.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 14, 2015)

Cirdan said:


> -Old martial artists are soooo wise in the ways of the world.


This one is great, I've met many an average or below average aging martial artist who find their bb magazine quotes particularly insightful. Or just read anything by "Bodhi Sanders".


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 14, 2015)

1. most keyboard warriors have no clue what they are talking about
2. after doing something a thousand times you start to understand after doing it 5 thousand times you have a      different perspective of what your doing
3. I learned this from a video on you tube


----------



## drop bear (Jan 14, 2015)

I don't like the f=mXa equation. It is not technically correct as a punch would be measured in pressure. And i am not sure what it is supposed to teach you anyway.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I don't like the f=mXa equation. It is not technically correct as a punch would be measured in pressure. And i am not sure what it is supposed to teach you anyway.


I am liking it. If you believe in making the weight of the weapon do the work, you can really start to relax, and focus on speed and alignment.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 14, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I am liking it. If you believe in making the weight of the weapon do the work, you can really start to relax, and focus on speed and alignment.



ok so unarmed is the weapon thee hand or the hip?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> ok so unarmed is the weapon thee hand or the hip?


Your hand is the weapon. Unless you are hitting with your hip; then, of course, the hip would, then, be the weapon. I hope that is clear.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 14, 2015)

Cirdan said:


> More cliches that makes me go
> 
> -Martial arts make kids violent.
> -Martial artists can suddenly fly off the handle in a blur of strikes while yelling WHAIIIIIIIII!!!!
> ...


Of course there's also:

Martial arts will teach you/your kid discipline.
Martial arts are wise, super-calm, emotionless...


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Of course there's also:
> 
> Martial arts will teach you/your kid discipline.
> Martial arts are wise, super-calm, emotionless...


I agree with the first one, laugh at the second one. ,,, Now, what the hell is wrong with the idea that martial arts is a discipline, and that you might possibly teach that to their kids?


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 14, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I agree with the first one, laugh at the second one. ,,, Now, what the hell is wrong with the idea that martial arts is a discipline, and that you might possibly teach that to their kids?


Martial arts won't teach you or your kid discipline, any more than football or wrestling or religion class or music or anything else will -- by itself.  Train in a class where discipline is expected, modeled, and part of the atmosphere, and you'll develop traits of discipline.  I've seen some schools do a great job instilling discipline.  I've seen plenty that pay lip service, but don't really model or instill discipline.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Martial arts won't teach you or your kid discipline, any more than football or wrestling or religion class or music or anything else will -- by itself.  Train in a class where discipline is expected, modeled, and part of the atmosphere, and you'll develop traits of discipline.  I've seen some schools do a great job instilling discipline.  I've seen plenty that pay lip service, but don't really model or instill discipline.


Learning a discipline, instills discipline. You can judge how well or how poorly a school does it, but what is wrong with music and football? What does it take for you to decide discipline was instilled, and by what?


----------



## elder999 (Jan 14, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Of course there's also:
> 
> Martial arts will teach you/your kid discipline.
> Martial arts are wise, super-calm, emotionless...






Touch Of Death said:


> I agree with the first one, laugh at the second one. ,,, Now, what the hell is wrong with the idea that martial arts is a discipline, and that you might possibly teach that to their kids?



Discipline is a means to an end-*not* an end in itself/


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Discipline is a means to an end-*not* an end in itself/


Discipline is not allowing yourself to fail. If you need others pick up your slack, you are undisciplined. We are all tryin'... What?


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 14, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Discipline is not allowing yourself to fail. If you need others pick up your slack, you are undisciplined. We are all tryin'... What?


I would say that refusing to fail, picking yourself up and going on again and again, is perseverance, not discipline.

Discipline, is "control that is gained by requiring that rules or orders be obeyed...; a way of behaving that shows a willingness to obey rules or orders..."  I might say that, in context, discipline is the ability and willingness to hold yourself to standards of behavior or expectations of performance.  To me -- you instill discipline in another by having standards, following them yourself (modeling the behavior) and holding them to standards.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> I would say that refusing to fail, picking yourself up and going on again and again, is perseverance, not discipline.
> 
> Discipline, is "control that is gained by requiring that rules or orders be obeyed...; a way of behaving that shows a willingness to obey rules or orders..."  I might say that, in context, discipline is the ability and willingness to hold yourself to standards of behavior or expectations of performance.  To me -- you instill discipline in another by having standards, following them yourself (modeling the behavior) and holding them to standards.


The control is gained by a series of punishments: First by you parents; teachers; and hopefully yourself. Of course we have an entire police force set up for those that fail the third thing, but the key is adherence to a standard. I don't disagree with you, but you have to go through those first two gates.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 14, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> iscipline, is "control that is gained by requiring that rules or orders be obeyed...; a way of behaving that shows a willingness to obey rules or orders..."  I might say that, in context, discipline is the ability and willingness to hold yourself to standards of behavior or expectations of performance.  To me -- you instill discipline in another by having standards, following them yourself (modeling the behavior) and holding them to standards.



Then the Nazis were disciplined, yes?

Sometimes al Qaeda?/

Hezbollah?

Boko Haram?

The Red Brigades?

The KKK?

Aryan Nations?

or, if one prefers, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the U.S. army, some police forces, some martial artists, professional criminals, pro athletes, world class chess-players ("world class" *anything*), arbitragers, stock brokers, ministers,priests, rabbis, devil-worshipers,  and more than a few of my sex partners.....
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





_*Discipline* is a means to an end, and *never* and end in itself.[/b]_


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Then the Nazis were disciplined, yes?
> 
> Sometimes al Qaeda?/
> 
> ...


And...


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 14, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> The control is gained by a series of punishments: First by you parents; teachers; and hopefully yourself. Of course we have an entire police force set up for those that fail the third thing, but the key is adherence to a standard. I don't disagree with you, but you have to go through those first two gates.


Is punishment the only way to get that behavior?


elder999 said:


> _*Discipline* is a means to an end, and *never* and end in itself.[/b]_



As you say --- discipline is a tool, not an end.  Like any tool, it can be used to achieve good ends (straight As for school student, advancement for a martial arts student, weight loss/body definition for a body builder, the summit for a climber  ) or it can be used to produce negative outcomes -- like the Nazi death camp machine or suicide bombers.

Or kids who do exactly what an adult tells them -- no matter who that adult is. The point's not original to me, but I think it's valid:  what are we teaching kids when we tell them to "do what an adult says" ?


----------



## elder999 (Jan 14, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> And...


*And* "discipline" (for those who know what the word means) is a _means_ to an *end*, and never an *end* in itself.

Not always a virtue, discipline.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

elder999 said:


> *And* "discipline" (for those who know what the word means) is a _means_ to an *end*, and never an *end* in itself.
> 
> Not always a virtue, discipline.


Only when you don't value the standard.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

elder999 said:


> *And* "discipline" (for those who know what the word means) is a _means_ to an *end*, and never an *end* in itself.
> 
> Not always a virtue, discipline.


The virtue is holding to the standard. You can go and debate the standard all you want, but a disciplined person is an end to itself.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 14, 2015)

Folks, if you'd like to debate definitions and virtues, please start a thread for that. 
Let's keep this one on topic, shall we?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 14, 2015)

1. I like to keep my style "pure". If I cross train Taiji and boxing and If I get into a fight, I'll use Taiji on M, W, F, and use boxing on Tu, Th, Sat. I'll never mix those 2 arts.
2. The roundhouse kick is against my style principle. I'll never do that.
3. There are something that cannot be explained. It can only be felt.
4. The "internal" weight lifting method is superior than the external weight lifting method.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Folks, if you'd like to debate definitions and virtues, please start a thread for that.
> Let's keep this one on topic, shall we?


I'll hold myself to your standard.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. I like to keep my style "pure". If I cross train Taiji and boxing and If I get into a fight, I'll use Taiji on M, W, F, and use boxing on Tu, Th, Sat. I'll never mix those 2 arts.
> 2. The roundhouse kick is against my style principle. I'll never do that.
> 3. There are something that cannot be explained. It can only be felt.
> 4. The "internal" weight lifting method is superior than the external weight lifting method.


I'm not tainting my art with everyone's freaky stuff.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 15, 2015)

Cliche. Everybody and all Ma is Karate.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Cliche. Everybody and all Ma is Karate.


That is false. It is all Kenpo, of course.


----------



## Buka (Jan 15, 2015)

I miss the legendary cliche's and urban legends of the oh so fun 1960's.
*
Black Belts have to register their hands with the police department.

If you're about to get into a fight you have to warn the other person you know Karate.*

Those were fricken classics.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

"women only do and are good at kata and men don't do kata because they are good at sparring"


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> "women only do and are good at kata and men don't do kata because they are good at sparring"



You're actually the very first person I can ever recall saying this... are you sure it's a cliche?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> You're actually the very first person I can ever recall saying this... are you sure it's a cliche?



I've heard it said quite a few times, are you accusing me of making it up?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I've heard it said quite a few times, are you accusing me of making it up?



No. I am stating a fact ("You're actually the very first person I can ever recall saying this") and asking a question ("[A]re you sure it's a cliche?").

A cliche' is "a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought" so it would follow that if it's a cliche, it is something that most people will have heard. Like Bukas' 'registered hands' cliche'. Is there anyone who hasn't heard THAT one?

You do not that not every question is an accusation, right?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> No. I am stating a fact ("You're actually the very first person I can ever recall saying this") and asking a question ("[A]re you sure it's a cliche?").
> 
> A cliche' is "a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought" so it would follow that if it's a cliche, it is something that most people will have heard. Like Bukas' 'registered hands' cliche'. Is there anyone who hasn't heard THAT one?
> 
> You do not that not every question is an accusation, right?




Actually I've never heard anyone say that you have to register your hands, not in person. I've heard people say they've heard it and it's a bit joke in martial arts but never met anyone who said it or even believed it.
In an organisation I was in before, a large countrywide organisation, the women and kata thing was widely used. I've also seen it written down in quite a few places including on MT in the past, perhaps being female I notice whereas men wouldn't.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 15, 2015)

JCVD. Beaten beaten to a pulp then the miraculous movie recovery. Got to be a cliche surely!


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 15, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 3. There are something that cannot be explained. It can only be felt..



Translation: "I don't know how to explain it."  Which isn't a crime, some things are really hard to explain, and you may not have the knowledge to give a good answer.  But I'm not a fan of dressing up ignorance with fru-fru stuff.  Just be honest.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 15, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Of course there's also:
> 
> Martial arts will teach you/your kid discipline.
> Martial arts are wise, super-calm, emotionless...



For the first, I think it can.  But so can dance, football, piano, or anything else that requires discipline and dedication to be successful and progress in.

For the second, yeah, martial artists are just people.  They're not wiser or more spiritual or whatever than others.


----------



## Buka (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> "women only do and are good at kata and men don't do kata because they are good at sparring"



Must be a cultural thing, Tez. I've heard all kinds of nonsense out of the mouthes of Martial Arts people, but never that one. I would imagine that ticks you off, sure would me. I also can't think of a guy in the arts that would have the balls to say that out loud in front of a woman. I don't think he'd last long around here.

Of course, we're a bit more civilized around here.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I've heard it said quite a few times, are you accusing me of making it up?


It sounds very British. American men are all about Forms and Kata. In fact, women here would rather scrap than dance around in their pajamas for the crowd. Most American women think clogging is risqué. LOL


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Where are the Women in Karate Discussing Karate s Macho-Man Culture KARATEbyJesse
I imagine that most men won't have heard it because they won't have been told it would they? They aren't going to be patted on the head and told that kata is just the thing for them so the likelihood of men coming across this is far less than women. If you read a lot of them comments in the link you may well not have heard of what they have to say, it's encouraging though that_ not_ all the comments are about not including women.
If in America it's all about the kata then someone has better tell that very angry American in the other thread who hates kata and thinks we should too. I have absolutely no idea what clogging is or what relevance it has to anything.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Where are the Women in Karate Discussing Karate s Macho-Man Culture KARATEbyJesse
> I imagine that most men won't have heard it because they won't have been told it would they? They aren't going to be patted on the head and told that kata is just the thing for them so the likelihood of men coming across this is far less than women. If you read a lot of them comments in the link you may well not have heard of what they have to say, it's encouraging though that_ not_ all the comments are about not including women.
> If in America it's all about the kata then someone has better tell that very angry American in the other thread who hates kata and thinks we should too. I have absolutely no idea what clogging is or what relevance it has to anything.


I know there are sport focused martial arts in the US, but do they really count?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Pat a girl on the head with that comment, in the US, and you may draw back a stump.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Pat a girl on the head with that comment, in the US, and you may draw back a stump.



Why is now a nationalist thing? Do you assume that women elsewhere in the world women don't bite back when treated like this? I'm not sure what sports based martial arts have to do with anything either.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Why is now a nationalist thing? Do you assume that women elsewhere in the world women don't bite back when treated like this? I'm not sure what sports based martial arts have to do with anything either.


I could point out that you brought it up, but what good would it do me? Women, in the US, don't join the martial arts for show. Never have, never will. Martial Arts teachers would never think to say that to them.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> It sounds very British. American men are all about Forms and Kata



I didn't bring up anything about nationality, you did, as you are again. I can't see what the 'for show' has to do with it either.

QUOTE="Touch Of Death,Women, in the US, don't join the martial arts for show.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Americans are less stoic. It is just one of those realties.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I didn't bring up anything about nationality, you did, as you are again. I can't see what the 'for show' has to do with it either.
> 
> QUOTE="Touch Of Death,Women, in the US, don't join the martial arts for show.


[/QUOTE]
You were calling me on so many things at once, you missed what I was referring to, sport Ma.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Americans are less stoic. It is just one of those realties.



That's not a very nice thing to say about Americans. I can't see what it has to do with anything either.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

You were calling me on so many things at once, you missed what I was referring to, sport Ma.[/QUOTE]

You need to explain yourself properly. And stop insulting your fellow countrymen and women.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> That's not a very nice thing to say about Americans. I can't see what it has to do with anything either.


I think it is a nice thing to say.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> You were calling me on so many things at once, you missed what I was referring to, sport Ma.



You need to explain yourself properly. And stop insulting your fellow countrymen and women.[/QUOTE]
I didn't insult anyone. Do you value stoicism?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> I think it is a nice thing to say.



No, it's not really.

meaning of stoic.

*1*.
a person who can endure pain or hardship without showing their feelings or complaining.

*2*.
a member of the ancient philosophical school of Stoicism.
_adjective_
adjective: *stoic*; adjective: *Stoic*

*1*.
another term for stoical.
"a look of stoic resignation"
*2*.
of or belonging to the Stoics or their school of philosophy.
"the Stoic philosophers"


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> No, it's not really.
> 
> meaning of stoic.
> 
> ...


Americans Complain, TEZ3. Perhaps you haven't heard.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Americans Complain, TEZ3. Perhaps you haven't heard.



No I haven't, they may 'complain' if they receive bad service etc but then so does everyone, everywhere as they should. Americans don't whinge about things, they are no less stoical in the face of adversity than anyone else!  Americans have gone through bad times and not collapsed complaining.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> No I haven't, they may 'complain' if they receive bad service etc but then so does everyone, everywhere as they should. Americans don't whinge about things, they are no less stoical in the face of adversity than anyone else!  Americans have gone through bad times and not collapsed complaining.


No, we rally, because we are pissed. It is all part of our lack of stoicism. We show anger, we laugh, we cry, and we fight back, but you can never accuse us of being a bunch of stoics.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> No, we rally, because we are pissed. It is all part of our lack of stoicism. We show anger, we laugh, we cry, and we fight back, but you can never accuse us of being a bunch of stoics.



You're drunk? ie pissed. 

Really, I think I can honestly say you are the most baffling poster I have ever come across.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 15, 2015)

Folks. One more time  I'm going to say this. This thread is about cliches. If you'd like to discuss the definitions of stoic, or slang terms like pissed, please start another thread. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 15, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Folks. One more time  I'm going to say this. This thread is about cliches. If you'd like to discuss the definitions of stoic, or slang terms like pissed, please start another thread.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


Could you provide a list of clichés we are not allowed to debate. I get lost.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 15, 2015)

Touch Of Death said:


> Americans Complain, TEZ3. Perhaps you haven't heard.



speaking of complaining though. There may be evidence to disprove your theory.

And Australian women are of course the best.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 15, 2015)

the next form is Sanchin you will absolutely love it

he is a black belt be respectful. I don't care if he is 6 years old

practice makes perfection unless you practice incorrectly


----------



## drop bear (Jan 16, 2015)

tshadowchaser said:


> the next form is Sanchin you will absolutely love it
> 
> he is a black belt be respectful. I don't care if he is 6 years old
> 
> practice makes perfection unless you practice incorrectly



And with the 6 year old when you get a " out he will kick your ***,tee hee"


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 16, 2015)

Try to be nice people. TOD probably has a hangover lol, but the jibes are getting boring. I don't know enough MA cliches, need more


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 16, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Try to be nice people. TOD probably has a hangover lol, but the jibes are getting boring. I don't know enough MA cliches, need more




A lot of them aren't as much clichés as used by martial artists but clichés used by non martial artists and wannabes trying to impress, which is why some of them are so wrong.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 16, 2015)

"All martial arts originated in India" or anything related to all arts originating in one place. The story usually goes that all arts came from temples in China and was brought there by Indian monks. Some Kung fu may have its origins there but surely not every art does. As long as people have been fighting surely they've been figuring out the best way to do it and no one culture has had a monopoly on violence.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 16, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> "All martial arts originated in India" or anything related to all arts originating in one place. The story usually goes that all arts came from temples in China and was brought there by Indian monks. Some Kung fu may have its origins there but surely not every art does. As long as people have been fighting surely they've been figuring out the best way to do it and no one culture has had a monopoly on violence.




Just seen 'all martial arts originate in China' posted today ( or yesterday) in a thread on MT.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 16, 2015)

LOW PERCENTAGE TECHNIQUES!


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 16, 2015)

Cirdan said:


> LOW PERCENTAGE TECHNIQUES!


What's wrong with that? Low percentage just describes the likelihood a technique will be successful. Another term might just be "difficult" as in required skill to use said technique.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 16, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> What's wrong with that? Low percentage just describes the likelihood a technique will be successful. Another term might just be "difficult" as in required skill to use said technique.


----------

