Disabled--looking to practice

[Martial D]

It's not about overconfidence. If anyone on these boards thinks their training means they will always win they are overconfident. It is not overconfident to recognize people who do street robberies are looking for soft targets. When you show they aren't soft they go looking for another target. Self defense isn't about beating the other guy down, it's about getting out of a bad situation and having the other guy leave is getting out.

Exactly my point actually. I just add the more realistic qualifier that it is highly unlikely that a disabled person will be able to overcome one or more full grown able bodied attackers regardless of any 'self defense training'(a large percentage of which is pure bullshido anyway).

Feel free to dislike, disagree, whatever. Doesn't hurt my feelings. Reality is what it is.

 

[Headhunter]

Exactly my point actually. I just add the more realistic qualifier that it is highly unlikely that a disabled person will be able to overcome one or more full grown able bodied attackers regardless of any 'self defense training'(a large percentage of which is pure bullshido anyway).

Feel free to dislike, disagree, whatever. Doesn't hurt my feelings. Reality is what it is.

Sooo now you're claiming self defence training doesn't work at all....okay

 

[Headhunter]

Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true. Facts schmacts

Facts mean nothing and that's a fact

 

[Tez3]

Exactly my point actually. I just add the more realistic qualifier that it is highly unlikely that a disabled person will be able to overcome one or more full grown able bodied attackers regardless of any 'self defense training'(a large percentage of which is pure bullshido anyway).

Feel free to dislike, disagree, whatever. Doesn't hurt my feelings. Reality is what it is.

Your points should be made on a new thread put up by you not on a thread made by someone new who has come here to ask a question.


I would suggest we ignore your points until you make them elsewhere and leave the OP alone because whether you realise it or not you are attacking him/her with your labouring of a point that clearly is designed to demoralise anyone who is disabled. Your reality isn't necessarily the true reality, after all plenty of people believe the world to be flat and will tell you ad nauseum that the flat earth is a reality. The truth is...it's your opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[oftheherd1]

Perhaps that is the case for some wheelchair users, and perhaps not for others, maybe you are generalising about wheelchair users?

Either way, I think OP in seeking after constructive defence information to help their selves is showing they do not wish to be helpless, do not wish to be burden on anyone else and I think that ought to be applauded you would not agree? specially when other able bodied folk expect other agencies to keep them safe, no??

arguing over pettiness is fine that is what internet is for and but I am sure as martial artist you have thoughts or constructive information you can give

This from Jenna.

I love the hit and run disagree monkeys.

Ok wise guys, let's have the argument for how you think it's realistic for someone in a wheelchair or that needs to hold themselves up on a crutch to defend themselves against able bodied attackers in the street? I'll surely hold my breath...

I have no idea how this got from the OP's simple request, to wheelchair users not being able to defend themselves. But the below URLs may provide some food for thought.

wheelchair karate - Bing

I don't think anyone would expect that all persons could be as good as the above. But no all persons can be a successful martial artist, handicapped or not.

As to the OP, there is some good advice in response, and you are on the right track in my opinion, seeking to use cane techniques. Just ignore the bad advice, it is pretty obvious. We have members here who seem better at negativity than is required. Ignore them as well.

Welcome to MT and I look forward to you sharing your journey with us and any others who are handicapped in any way who may be able to be inspired by what you share here.

 

[Charlemagne]

OK, not trying to go against Mod warnings but that one actually has me scratching my head.......

The definition of fact is a thing that is indisputably the case.

So facts are used to prove...well...truths and reality.... since "indisputable" means unable to be challenged or denied.....the question is what is actually a fact and what is not....

or it simply could be a case of I missed the joke...if so my apologies.

I believe he was intending that to be somewhat a joke, but also somewhat real.

The reality comes in that, just because a few people here and there have done something, does not necessarily make it likely or probable. Put in the context of this thread. Yes, there have been people with various disabilities who have successfully defended themselves without the use of weapons. However, that does not mean that it is commonplace OR that such persons are not at a disadvantage against persons who do not have to deal with their same conditions. If everything else was equal, the person who does not suffer from the same conditions is at a significant disadvantage, and it is dishonest, and perhaps even dangerous in the context of personal protection, to argue otherwise.

A real-world self-defense situation is typically one where someone else has chosen the time, circumstances, etc. of the engagement. They are working to stack the deck against you as much as you can. As such, the smart play is to do everything one can to put the odds in YOUR favor, not rely on being one of the outliers.

A weapon is the great equalizer for persons who differing bodily abilities. That could mean our OP, a little old lady who is frail, or a younger person coming off of a surgery. There are any number of scenarios.

I'll stick with my original recommendations to the OP. Something that could be fun and functional, such as FMA (mostly due to the weapons consideration) or GJJ, when combined with legit firearms training, would likely be the best combination of choices to satisfy both the fitness and self-defense aspect of things. In addition, I'll stick with my recommendation for exploring some legit strength training. The reality is that, with a few notable exceptions, most of the martial arts training that people are involved doesn't do much at all for fitness, as can easily be noted by the number of overweight and out of shape black belts that exist.

 

[Charlemagne]

This from Jenna.



I have no idea how this got from the OP's simple request, to wheelchair users not being able to defend themselves. But the below URLs may provide some food for thought.

wheelchair karate - Bing

Interesting, thanks for sharing. If you find anything where people give attacks that are a bit more dynamic, and not just from standing directly in front, I'd be interested in seeing that as well.

Cheers,

 

[Juany118]

Exactly my point actually. I just add the more realistic qualifier that it is highly unlikely that a disabled person will be able to overcome one or more full grown able bodied attackers regardless of any 'self defense training'(a large percentage of which is pure bullshido anyway).

Feel free to dislike, disagree, whatever. Doesn't hurt my feelings. Reality is what it is.

You are missing the point. You rarely, if ever, have to overcome an attacker in a typical street scenario where unarmed self-defense is required. A random teen attacking, a person looking to take your bag/wallet, they are all purposefully looking for those that appear.
1. Unaware
2. Physically vulnerable.

Not just one of the above, but both. First Martial arts with self defense as a goal teaches situational awareness. The mere fact that you show you are aware of your surroundings will put them off because the element of surprise is compromised and your awareness also means that you can identify them later.

Second the minute they get wacked in an obviously trained way with a weapon, or are put into a lock, it is very unlikely they are going to continue the attack because A. The cops may show up in time B. If they get injured they are even more easily identifiable.

You seem fixated on the idea that self defense is about overcoming an opponent. That is in the ring, or when the attacker is simply intent on beating the crap out of you. The most common street assaults aren't like that. The perpetrators do a cost/benefit analysis and when the cost outweighs the benefit they cut their loses and run. That's all self defense ultimately is, making the cost higher, it's not about overcoming the opponent.

It's about holding on until others show up.

It's about bloodying them so they run...

It's about using the cane...

You really seem to have a unique ability to ignore any experience or evidence that contradicts a preconceived notion you form with little apparent evidence or experience.

 

[Paul_D]

That's like saying 1/1000000 golfers get hit by lightning, so it's realistic to expect to be hit by lightning every round of golf.

So previously in another thread you refused to believe Aikido could be used for real and asked "Please post a video of someone using aikido in a real combat situation defeating anybody", I posted such a video and you dismissed it arguing it wasn't aikido, even though it clearly was.

Now you say people in wheelchairs can't defend themselves, and when again presented with evidence you dismiss it.

So if your opinions can't be changed by evidence, what is it that you require?

 

[Martial D]

So previously in another thread you refused to believe Aikido could be used for real and asked "Please post a video of someone using aikido in a real combat situation defeating anybody", I posted such a video and you dismissed it arguing it wasn't aikido, even though it clearly was.

Now you say people in wheelchairs can't defend themselves, and when again presented with evidence you dismiss it.

So if your opinions can't be changed by evidence, what is it that you require?

First, your previous example re aikido was disingenuous, as is this rehash, and I'll leave it at that.
Second, again, the existence of these very low probability scenarios says nothing about the norm. I didn't say impossible, I said unlikely. I could upload several videos of people surviving skydiving accidents and claim 'see, who needs a parachute?' to the same effect.

 

[Juany118]

First, your previous example re aikido was disingenuous, as is this rehash, and I'll leave it at that.
Second, again, the existence of these very low probability scenarios says nothing about the norm. I didn't say impossible, I said unlikely. I could upload several videos of people surviving skydiving accidents and claim 'see, who needs a parachute?' to the same effect.

That last bit is a rather transparent effort to undercut actual evidence.

You dismissed the actual dynamics of a street attack and the purpose of self defense. Video is then posted showing these dynamics and purpose in practice with UNTRAINED people.

 

[Martial D]

My apologies to the OP for my part in this conversation on your intro thread.

This is about what to expect from MT though. You will find a very diverse set of outlooks and opinions here.

 

[Tez3]

You will find a very diverse set of outlooks and opinions here.

and that is what it makes it interesting. We come from different parts of the world, we train different styles, we are all very different in our life experiences. We have different jobs and careers as well as different religions, thoughts, political allegiances, just about everything. We do have the one thing in common though... a love of martial arts. There rarely one answer to any question, we approach things differently however when we all agree as we do on here ( apart from you) you can take it as being something that is true.

 

[Paul_D]

First, your previous example re aikido was disingenuous, as is this rehash, and I'll leave it at that.
Second, again, the existence of these very low probability scenarios says nothing about the norm. I didn't say impossible, I said unlikely. I could upload several videos of people surviving skydiving accidents and claim 'see, who needs a parachute?' to the same effect.

You haven't answered the question, if you don't accept evidence, what does it take for you to change your opinion?

 

[Martial D]

You haven't answered the question, if you don't accept evidence, what does it take for you to change your opinion?

When did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Paul_D]

When did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Martial D]

Not at all. Why don't you google that sentence since you seem to be unaware of the reference.

As per this thread, it's been returned to owner.

 

[Tez3]

Not at all. Why don't you google that sentence since you seem to be unaware of the reference.

Sigh. Refusing to bite doesn't mean he's unaware of the reference. We all got it, however it's redundant in this thread.

 

[Headhunter]

When did you stop beating your wife?

Jeez this thread has really lost it's original intent

 

[Martial D]

Sigh. Refusing to bite doesn't mean he's unaware of the reference. We all got it, however it's redundant in this thread.

It would seem you do not understand what a loaded question is. No matter.

You do you.