Examples from the real world involving KMA's

[Kong Soo Do]

That brings up the interesting question as to whether or not a person is responsible in any country for the consequences of teaching a martial art. That is, if you teach a martial art, and a student uses it, provoked or unprovoked, is the teacher then responsible? Especially if it is used in a manner considered illegal in that country. I doubt that is so, but I couldn't be sure some country or culture would not hold a teach responsible. If that were so, a teacher would need to know the laws of the country for sure. Other than that, a teacher would probably be best advised not to try and become a lawyer as well.

That is an interesting question. I know that according to Uechi-Ryu history, Uechi Kanbun Sensei while teaching in China taught a student who reportedly killed a man over a land dispute. The actual details are fuzzy, and according to some it was actually Uechi Kanbun Sensei that killed a man. But going by the history as presented, Uechi Kanbun Sensei felt such personal responsibility for his students actions that he quite teaching and moved back to Okinawa, vowing to never teach again. This isn't a vow he kept, but it was many years before he actually taught again. A different version of the story is that the Chinese community no longer trusted Uechi Kanbun Sensei and would not allow him to teach any longer.

Closer to home, as a L.E. instructor I am 'somewhat' responsible for what and how I teach. For example, if I teach properly I can be called into court as an expert witness to discuss what was taught, why it was taught and the expected outcome(s). I'm not on trial personally, but I have to be able to intelligently articulate the details of the training and if the Officer/Deputy/Agent used the training according to policy and how it was taught. If I taught something outside the course outline and the Officer/Deputy/Agent used it with a bad outcome I possibly could be called into question. I've not seen that happen, but that isn't to say it couldn't happen or has happened to some instructor somewhere.

Could a martial arts instructor be called into a court of law to explain what he has taught, to whom he has taught it and why he has taught it? Yes. Would he be directly 'on trial'? No. But from a business aspect it probably wouldn't do very well to have bad publicity because you taught something 'incorrectly' or to the wrong person or in an irresponsible manner. I'm not sure there is a criminal law but certainly anyone can be civilly sued.

It would be interesting to hear what other countries do or have done.

 

[oftheherd1]

That is an interesting question. I know that according to Uechi-Ryu history, Uechi Kanbun Sensei while teaching in China taught a student who reportedly killed a man over a land dispute. The actual details are fuzzy, and according to some it was actually Uechi Kanbun Sensei that killed a man. But going by the history as presented, Uechi Kanbun Sensei felt such personal responsibility for his students actions that he quite teaching and moved back to Okinawa, vowing to never teach again. This isn't a vow he kept, but it was many years before he actually taught again. A different version of the story is that the Chinese community no longer trusted Uechi Kanbun Sensei and would not allow him to teach any longer.

Closer to home, as a L.E. instructor I am 'somewhat' responsible for what and how I teach. For example, if I teach properly I can be called into court as an expert witness to discuss what was taught, why it was taught and the expected outcome(s). I'm not on trial personally, but I have to be able to intelligently articulate the details of the training and if the Officer/Deputy/Agent used the training according to policy and how it was taught. If I taught something outside the course outline and the Officer/Deputy/Agent used it with a bad outcome I possibly could be called into question. I've not seen that happen, but that isn't to say it couldn't happen or has happened to some instructor somewhere.

Could a martial arts instructor be called into a court of law to explain what he has taught, to whom he has taught it and why he has taught it? Yes. Would he be directly 'on trial'? No. But from a business aspect it probably wouldn't do very well to have bad publicity because you taught something 'incorrectly' or to the wrong person or in an irresponsible manner. I'm not sure there is a criminal law but certainly anyone can be civilly sued.

It would be interesting to hear what other countries do or have done.

Yes, it would be interesting. I think in the USA, a lot would depend on pre-testimony preparation. As I am sure you know Kong Soo Do, a smart lawyer will discuss testimony with a witness prior to trial. Not to tell the witness what to say (illegal), but to explore what will be asked and learn expected answers. Questions can be modified if necessary. For the LE instructor, it would seem important to make sure the lawyer knows what to ask since this is a field most lawyers won't be familiar with. In the event the instructor is also a MA, it is important to emphacise the training needed to achieve whatever belt(s) the instructor has, which elevates the instructor to an even higher level of expertise. It would probably help to explain what different styles bring to the art of an MA.

This actually brings up another question I have often had, and a co-worker and I have discussed. How does one equate black belts to formal college education? Is a 1st dan equivalent to an undergrad degree? If so, what constitutes a master and a doctorate. Is all that work for 1st dan only equivalent to a HS diploma? Therefore 2nd dan and higher being needed for undergrad equivalent? That could also be useful to a lawyer in qualifying a witness as an expert.

I don't know if that has ever been discussed here at MT. Either way, it would be interesting to get other's opinions. It could be useful in court. What do those here who have or are approaching their black belt level think?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

This actually brings up another question I have often had, and a co-worker and I have discussed. How does one equate black belts to formal college education? Is a 1st dan equivalent to an undergrad degree? If so, what constitutes a master and a doctorate. Is all that work for 1st dan only equivalent to a HS diploma? Therefore 2nd dan and higher being needed for undergrad equivalent? That could also be useful to a lawyer in qualifying a witness as an expert.

I don't know if that has ever been discussed here at MT. Either way, it would be interesting to get other's opinions. It could be useful in court. What do those here who have or are approaching their black belt level think?

I don't know, but interesting thought. It seems like it would be hard to equate the two. Which art or arts would it be based on? Different arts have different length times to reach a first Dan as well as the higher Dan levels. Who would make the final determination?

 

[oftheherd1]

I don't know, but interesting thought. It seems like it would be hard to equate the two. Which art or arts would it be based on? Different arts have different length times to reach a first Dan as well as the higher Dan levels. Who would make the final determination?

Well, I hadn't considered the question you correctly raise about different styles and different lengths required in different styles. Or how does one equate a short seminar where one obtains rank of 2nd, 3rd, or 4th Dan from a school?

But assume a traditional schooling of say 1 or two or more years to 1st Dan, with similar lengths for subsequent Dan rankings. Do you think that can be related to under-grad or post grad education? I am inclined to think so, just not sure where the break downs should be. Again, consider the time spent in getting a 4 year degree. There is the time in class and the time independent study. There is class taught learning, and there is homework to strengthen those skills. It amounts to a lot of hours in study. Granted there are other classes in college besides those specific to the degree material. Does that put a MA ahead or behind?

Any thoughts by anyone? Just for the sake of consideration, or with the idea of in Kong Soo Do's case, one who must qualify as a expert in court, what thoughts do all of you have?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

That is actually an interesting thought to consider. I would submit that in order to have it equate as you've suggested that there would be a need for a recognized certifying body. For example, if I were called into court as a training officer the court would recognize several things; first, my state certification as an L.E.O. instructor. Secondly, any further training I've received through our regional training center which is accredited. Thirdly, the amount of documented experience I can demonstrate in the particular HL field.

For a MA to be accepted, be it in a court or for a degree or any other type of 'officially' recognized certification it would have to be recognized by that institution. In some cases, a MA instructors credentials may be recognized, in others it may not be. A lot depends on what can be documented. It would be interesting to hear others thoughts.

 

[oftheherd1]

Yep, 25 years ago I would have said my certification of my Dan rank with the Korean Hapkido Federation was certification enough. When I was teaching, that was what I offered, along with my GM's permission to teach. That has changed.

Whether or not one thinks instructor certifications are good or just money making, the fact is, most who teach these days are expected to have instructor certificaion. Therefor, it would probably be significant in a court of law for any lawyer wishing to contest someone being qualified as an expert. State certificaions for training LEO in defensive measures would certainly not hurt attempts at qualification as an expert.

But suppose all one has to offer is MA training. How might it best be shown at some belted point to qualify one as an expert? Any one want to offer suggestions and why?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Perhaps being able to articulate the amount of time it took, and the material demonstrated to become a black belt. Taken a step further, if one has reached the 'master' level in a particular art, and is able to articulate and demonstrate what it took to achieve that level it may be taken even more seriously. We have master plumbers, master electricians, master carpenters etc. Each requires levels of advancement, internship etc. Yes, some can just assume the title. But if one can offer certification from a recognized source it would help. But then the question becomes, 'what is a recognized source'?

 

[oftheherd1]

Perhaps being able to articulate the amount of time it took, and the material demonstrated to become a black belt. Taken a step further, if one has reached the 'master' level in a particular art, and is able to articulate and demonstrate what it took to achieve that level it may be taken even more seriously. We have master plumbers, master electricians, master carpenters etc. Each requires levels of advancement, internship etc. Yes, some can just assume the title. But if one can offer certification from a recognized source it would help. But then the question becomes, 'what is a recognized source'?

Hmmm, apprentice, journeyman, master from the trades. I hadn't considered that. That might be a way to relate it to a court. Surely a master plumber or master electrician could qualify as an expert in court? But somehow, it just seems there is more in the knowledge required, and the practice required, and time spent doing it, for comparisons to college.

But maybe not. I need to think on the trades possibilities. I'll try to get some ideas from some of the trades people I know at work.

Anyone else have any ideas?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Hmmm, apprentice, journeyman, master from the trades. I hadn't considered that. That might be a way to relate it to a court. Surely a master plumber or master electrician could qualify as an expert in court? But somehow, it just seems there is more in the knowledge required, and the practice required, and time spent doing it, for comparisons to college.

But maybe not. I need to think on the trades possibilities. I'll try to get some ideas from some of the trades people I know at work.

Anyone else have any ideas?

Any luck on this?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Hmmm, apprentice, journeyman, master from the trades. I hadn't considered that. That might be a way to relate it to a court. Surely a master plumber or master electrician could qualify as an expert in court? But somehow, it just seems there is more in the knowledge required, and the practice required, and time spent doing it, for comparisons to college.

But maybe not. I need to think on the trades possibilities. I'll try to get some ideas from some of the trades people I know at work.

Anyone else have any ideas?

Not an easy task.

I'd like to see more examples of members who have used their training in self-defense. Every incident can be utilized as a learning tool.

 

[shesulsa]

Not an easy task.

I'd like to see more examples of members who have used their training in self-defense. Every incident can be utilized as a learning tool.

Someone I had an underlying conflict with for a lot of years embraced me - one arm over and one arm under such that my right arm was under his left and my left arm was over his right. I was wary of this and for good reason - he turned quickly and tried to hip-throw me. I saw it coming so I dropped my weight a little, applied pressure points on the side of his neck with my right hand. My left hand found his left up on my left shoulder, so I grabbed his wrist, took the slack out of it, rotated the arm to lock it out across the back of my shoulders, stepped out to the left with one foot - he lost his balance here and reeled backward. I dropped down to one knee. The table broke and he was surprised as hell. "Are we done?"

His reply, "Yeah, and that will never happen again."

"Let's make sure it doesn't."

He is my brother. I think I earned some of his respect that day. He resorted to idle, long distance threats until he got clean. Our relationship is much better now.

This is not a technique per se in our system but all the core elements were applied:

Dropped my center
Locked out the arm
Pressure point attack
Pain compliance
Control of the opponent
efficiency of motion

 

[Kong Soo Do]

This is not a technique per se in our system but all the core elements were applied:

This is an excellent example of how the martial arts are realistically applied. Real altercations are not choreographed affairs, except in Hollywood. Real altercations are chaotic and usually ugly affairs. One may not be apple to apply/use a specific technique as learned in the Dojang, which is why it is more important to have understanding/master of the principles behind the technique(s). The principles can then be applied/utilized under duress with a flow from one to the next if necessary.

Thank you for the post and excellent point!