Family-friendly vs. ruthless: responsible teaching

[K-man]

K man,
So you teach lethal striking but no head shots? You gripe about tkds lack of head punching but don't teach it yourself?Interesting. You believe that most people are responsible? My mom has been a police dispatcher for 40 years. ..............

So yes, I do think the avarage person can be irresponsible regularly. Just not all of the time....hopefully.

Please show me where I said I don't teach punches to the head. I said I don't allow contact to the head although occasionally we put on the full face head guards, even though they are more to protect the eyes. I'm not sure there are too many lethal head punches you are likely to encounter. I prefer open hand strikes to the head or neck. I don't want my guys to instictively punch for the face. It is too low percentage. But my aversion in sparring of punching hard to the head is to do with permanent brain injury caused by medium grade impact and concussion.

Far from my "griping" about TKD, I am amused by the anomaly. You see two guys kicking the s#!t out of each other, they come within striking range then they stop fighting, move back and start kicking again. I accept TKD as a sport and I can accept that some TKD people genuinely train for SD but every bit of TKD I have personally seen has been training for the mat. To my mind, your TKD kicking to the head in competion, attempting to knock your opponent out, demonstrates perfectly your point of; "the average person can be irresponsible regularly". The kicks I teach are traditional karate kicks. Basically that means, we don't kick above the waist.

Now let's talk about your Mom. I'm sure she has dispatched literally thousands of cars to many horrendous incidents caused by your regularly irresponsible normal persons, and, she has told you about it. As a result you, quite rightly are concerned about this irresponsible behaviour of your fellow citizens. Can I now ask, why aren't you calling for people to stop driving cars? Why aren't you saying get rid of guns? No, stopping people driving is ridiculous, banning firearms, especially in the US, is not possible, but you don't want people teaching lethal close combat techniques to people who have demonstrated a dedication to the study of martial arts.

You have said nothing to allay my confusion. :asian:

 

[K-man]

Interesting.

I'd still be interested in your thoughts on not teaching such techniques at full power if you really believe "the way we play is the way we fight." If you don't train them full power it seems you would think they would not be used at full power in a self-defense situation.

Pax,

Chris

We put on chest and stomach protectors to enable full power strikes to the torso. That means we can teach some atemi at full power.

From msmitht: When I said "we" I was generalizing. I.e., not being specific to me and/or my school. Atemi waza is important but can not be taught at full power. I will concede that they, vital point striking(not that dillman garbage or neck stomping/fish hooking crap) can be taught at full speed to advanced practitioners.

Although George Dillman is promoting some things that I have not personally experienced, I think it a bit cruel to talk about "Dillman garbage". Dillman is an accomplished martial artist in his own right and has done an enormous amount for MAs particularly in the US.
"Official Karate magazine (Nov. 1982) described Dillman as "one of the winningest competitors karate has ever known." Dillman was four-times National Karate Champion (1969-1972) and during this period was consistently ranked among the top ten competitors in the nation by major karate magazines. During his nine-year competitive career, Dillman claimed a total of 327 trophies in fighting, forms, breaking and weapons."

If you (msmitht) think you can train vital point striking at full speed (power) you are mistaken. A full power punch to the torso normally won't cause permanent injury. A full power strike to many vital points may kill or permanently disable.

 

[msmitht]

Please show me where I said I don't teach punches to the head. I said I don't allow contact to the head although occasionally we put on the full face head guards, even though they are more to protect the eyes. I'm not sure there are too many lethal head punches you are likely to encounter. I prefer open hand strikes to the head or neck. I don't want my guys to instictively punch for the face. It is too low percentage. But my aversion in sparring of punching hard to the head is to do with permanent brain injury caused by medium grade impact and concussion.

Far from my "griping" about TKD, I am amused by the anomaly. You see two guys kicking the s#!t out of each other, they come within striking range then they stop fighting, move back and start kicking again. I accept TKD as a sport and I can accept that some TKD people genuinely train for SD but every bit of TKD I have personally seen has been training for the mat. To my mind, your TKD kicking to the head in competion, attempting to knock your opponent out, demonstrates perfectly your point of; "the average person can be irresponsible regularly". The kicks I teach are traditional karate kicks. Basically that means, we don't kick above the waist.

Now let's talk about your Mom. I'm sure she has dispatched literally thousands of cars to many horrendous incidents caused by your regularly irresponsible normal persons, and, she has told you about it. As a result you, quite rightly are concerned about this irresponsible behaviour of your fellow citizens. Can I now ask, why aren't you calling for people to stop driving cars? Why aren't you saying get rid of guns? No, stopping people driving is ridiculous, banning firearms, especially in the US, is not possible, but you don't want people teaching lethal close combat techniques to people who have demonstrated a dedication to the study of martial arts.

You have said nothing to allay my confusion. :asian:

Again, most people are not responsible enough for lethal cqc. Your rant about banning guns and driving is ludacris even though I would like to see a ban on firearms personally. You did say you don't allow head contact. I assumed you referred to all head strikes, including punching.
You are just arguing for the fun of it and I am done with you. Personally I find that the only style of karate I like is kyokushin, which I studied for 5 years. Most other styles were weak to say the least. My brazillian friends proved that long ago.

 

[msmitht]

We put on chest and stomach protectors to enable full power strikes to the torso. That means we can teach some atemi at full power.

Although George Dillman is promoting some things that I have not personally experienced, I think it a bit cruel to talk about "Dillman garbage". Dillman is an accomplished martial artist in his own right and has done an enormous amount for MAs particularly in the US.
"Official Karate magazine (Nov. 1982) described Dillman as "one of the winningest competitors karate has ever known." Dillman was four-times National Karate Champion (1969-1972) and during this period was consistently ranked among the top ten competitors in the nation by major karate magazines. During his nine-year competitive career, Dillman claimed a total of 327 trophies in fighting, forms, breaking and weapons."

If you (msmitht) think you can train vital point striking at full speed (power) you are mistaken. A full power punch to the torso normally won't cause permanent injury. A full power strike to many vital points may kill or permanently disable.

You are full of it. I never said full power. Full speed yes. Ill bet you think that you can kill with one punch, right? I have participated in a demo where a dillman pressure point expert called some of us on stage and tried to ko us with a few light slaps and finger jabs. It worked fine on his students but when he got to volunteers not one of us went down. So yes, I call it crap because that is what I saw/felt.
Stop trying to put words there that are not. I can see that we are not going to agree on many things.
Have a nice life, mate.

 

[msmitht]

Yes! Figured out how to "ignore" someone on mt. YAY!

 

[jks9199]

Again, most people are not responsible enough for lethal cqc. Your rant about banning guns and driving is ludacris even though I would like to see a ban on firearms personally. You did say you don't allow head contact. I assumed you referred to all head strikes, including punching.
You are just arguing for the fun of it and I am done with you. Personally I find that the only style of karate I like is kyokushin, which I studied for 5 years. Most other styles were weak to say the least. My brazillian friends proved that long ago.

It's not that ridiculous. You point to irresponsible driving, and criminal use of firearms as proof that "ordinary people" aren't to be trusted with lethal techniques. Legal firearm ownership and use is not strongly connected with recklessness, or each hunting season would be a bloodbath. If you want to assess recklessness on the road, you also have to consider the raw number of drivers and miles driven each day... Your argument that most people are irresponsible doesn't hold much water when you look at the relative numbers.

But... you say servicemen and women and police are responsible enough? I know plenty of service members and vets who are of questionable judgment and responsibility... Ask any provost marshal's office if you want numbers! And -- ignoring the outright criminals who somehow get badges -- I know more than a few cops with bad tempers, lousy judgment outside the narrowest confines of the job (and sometimes within them...)

 

[Earl Weiss]

In the US you can legally own military assault weapons.
. :asian:

This is a problematic statement in that there is no accepted definition of the term "assault Weapon"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

Those seeking to limit gun ownership define this term to suit their needs in order to choose what they want to limit with no rational basis for choosing those things over another.

 

[K-man]

This is a problematic statement in that there is no accepted definition of the term "assault Weapon"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

Those seeking to limit gun ownership define this term to suit their needs in order to choose what they want to limit with no rational basis for choosing those things over another.

I have no problem with that. I was just trying to point out that, according to msmitht, being allowed to own and use a firearm to kill someone if needed is fine, but using your hands in lethel self defence shouldn't be taught. Now, in light of the fact that I have stated I don't teach children and I agree that it shouldn't be taught to children, msmitht seems to be sticking to the proposition:

msmitht When I was an infantry marine we were trained to kill and with good reason. Eye gouging, heel stomping, throat ripping were the norm. THESE ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN OR CIVILLIANS. I don't care how you try to rationalize it.

All I'm saying is that I disagree with him. :asian:

 

[K-man]

Again, most people are not responsible enough for lethal cqc. Your rant about banning guns and driving is ludacris even though I would like to see a ban on firearms personally. You did say you don't allow head contact. I assumed you referred to all head strikes, including punching.
You are just arguing for the fun of it and I am done with you. Personally I find that the only style of karate I like is kyokushin, which I studied for 5 years. Most other styles were weak to say the least. My brazillian friends proved that long ago.

Let's look at what I actually said:

Can I now ask, why aren't you calling for people to stop driving cars? Why aren't you saying get rid of guns? No, stopping people driving is ridiculous, banning firearms, especially in the US, is not possible, but you don't want people teaching lethal close combat techniques to people who have demonstrated a dedication to the study of martial arts.

I had no rant, I did not suggest banning guns and I did say that it would be impossible to achieve. Stopping people driving I said was a ridiculous proposition.

rant
–verb (used without object) 1. to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.
–verb (used with object) 2. to utter or declaim in a ranting manner.
–noun 3. ranting, extravagant, or violent declamation.
4. a ranting utterance.

Origin:
1590–1600; < Dutch ranten (obsolete) to talk foolishly

I did say I don't allow punches to the head but I did not say I don't teach punches to the head. Within that context, I prefer open hand techniques to the head.

I am not arguing for the sake of arguing. I believe your position is not defendable. I respect that it is your opinion, but you didn't propose it as an opinion. You stated it as a fact in capital letters. " THESE ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN OR CIVILLIANS. " I disagree and I have pointed out where I believe your arguement doesn't hold up.

Your other opinion on the only style of karate you like is kyokushin, fine. You're big into sport. Kyokushin may well be one of the more effective styles for SD but it is sport, just like the BJJ you alluded to that is also sport.

So I'm glad you're blocking my posts. Maybe you won't insult me again (I'm thin skinned)
" There is always going to be some idiot who says....oh wait, I already said that. " Yep, that's me your talking about.

" You are full of it. " Yep, but you're helping me to get rid of it.

You bagged George Dillman; " not that dillman garbage ".
You bag my style without knowing what I teach or how. " Get over it already. Teaching someone how to rip out another persons throat does not make your style "combat effective". Almost every striking system teaches a finger jab, groin kick, knee stomp...etc, so no, you are not special or unique."
You mock Earle Weiss; " Wow. Thought that would be instinctual. They were not worried about hiv...or turning into a blood sucker that needed to be staked through the heart. Hey there's a lethal technique to add to the curriculum...rotflol! "
And you manage to put all karate down, bar Kyokushin. " I find that the only style of karate I like is kyokushin, which I studied for 5 years. Most other styles were weak to say the least. My brazillian friends proved that long ago. "

All that in the space of one thread ... then you run away! :wavey:

 

[puunui]

Read a recent article on the Supreme court decisons and the wording, and must say I don't agre with your post.

Try reading Justice Stevens' dissent in the Heller decision. Justice Scalia basically overturned 70 years worth of precedent.

 

[puunui]

You may wish to review District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).

Read that already and also all of the decisions prior to that dealing with the 2nd Amendment.

 

[puunui]

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Yes, let's just focus in on that and ignore the rest of the language. But without doing a google search, can you tell me what the phrase you quoted actually means from a Constitutional law standpoint? Or better yet, what is the significance of a constitutional right vs. a non-constitutional right? Does that mean that I have a right to keep and bear any type of arms for any reason without restriction? For example, can I keep and bear a live hand grenade?

 

[Earl Weiss]

Try reading Justice Stevens' dissent in the Heller decision. Justice Scalia basically overturned 70 years worth of precedent.

Well, I guess you agree with the dissent and agree with the majority. That doesn't make either or neither right or wrong.

 

[dancingalone]

I was about to write to correct some of the misunderstandings about karate, but K-man pretty much covered them.

I'm not aware how Dillman came into the conversation without just scanning the thread as I have, but it should be noted that not all atemi is directed towards pressure points. Sometimes a good strike to the face is more than sufficient, whether we hit the nose, temple, philtrum, jaw, or not.

Secondly, to say most karate is weak is the same as saying all taekwondo is weak, obviously a statement without merit. There is much effective knowledge about fighting/maiming/killing contained within karate if one still practices a non-neutered form of the art. On the other hand, it is indeed true that if you practice a sport form of TKD with lots of full contact sparring, kyokushin is probably the closest karate analog to it.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Yes, let's just focus in on that and ignore the rest of the language.

There's a difference between ignoring something and emphasizing a specific part of a statement, Glenn. I thought that was pretty obvious.

But without doing a google search, can you tell me what the phrase you quoted actually means from a Constitutional law standpoint? Or better yet, what is the significance of a constitutional right vs. a non-constitutional right?

Yes, I can.

I might ask you, however, if you could tell me any reason why I would believe that you would give anything I said an objective hearing since it's obvious that since you first posted here that you're not interested in anything I say because I used to post on the Dojang Digest several years ago?

Also, I might ask you if you are familiar with what the founders said about the nature of the militia mentioned in the 2nd amendment.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Well, I guess you agree with the dissent and agree with the majority. That doesn't make either or neither right or wrong.

Did you read both Justice Scalia's opinion and Justice Stevens' opinion before you decided that you agreed with Justice Scalia?

 

[puunui]

There's a difference between ignoring something and emphasizing a specific part of a statement, Glenn.

If you say so.

Yes, I can.

Great. I'm waiting for the answer.

I might ask you, however, if you could tell me any reason why I would believe that you would give anything I said an objective hearing since it's obvious that since you first posted here that you're not interested in anything I say because I used to post on the Dojang Digest several years ago?

It might be obvious to you, but not to me. You can believe whatever you want. I would just like to hear what you have to say about the issue at hand, something which I have spent time studying on my own. Like I said before I read all of the published decisions, supreme court as well as circuit court, and a couple of district court cases. I'd like to see what your opinions are, and more importantly, the basis for those opinions.

Also, I might ask you if you are familiar with what the founders said about the nature of the militia mentioned in the 2nd amendment.

Should I do a google search on that?

 

[puunui]

Secondly, to say most karate is weak is the same as saying all taekwondo is weak, obviously a statement without merit.

I think most martial arts students out there are unable to adequately defend themselves. I think most students (and teachers) are fooling themselves in believing that they can against someone whose skill level is beyond the ordinary or untrained. I think it is unreasonable to think that you will develop any sort of high skill level going to class once or twice per week, 45 minutes per class. I think those who have trained for a long time intuitively understand all of this. I think that it is the big unspoken secret that permeates traditional martial arts, especially in this, the MMA era. That ten move groin kicking, eye poking, head stomping, throat ripping one step sparring routine #43 your instructor worked so hard on developing just will not work against someone who is shooting for your legs and intent on grounding and pounding you.

 

[dancingalone]

I think most martial arts students out there are unable to adequately defend themselves. I think most students (and teachers) are fooling themselves in believing that they can against someone whose skill level is beyond the ordinary or untrained. I think it is unreasonable to think that you will develop any sort of high skill level going to class once or twice per week, 45 minutes per class.

If true, your first statement is a horrific indictment of the martial arts community as a whole. I would prefer that you be wrong, but you doubtlessly are right to an extent.

That said I do not know that most of us are necessarily training our students to be victorious over highly skilled fighters. That certainly is not the goal in my TKD class nor do I have any illusions that my students there will attain any great level of skill by and large. First the talent has to be there. Unless we select only those with the physical and mental aspects to excel, we will turn out exactly what we generally do: mostly middle class people in all shapes and sizes who just want some exercise and some SD skills. That doesn't exactly spell 'deadly warrior' to me.

What I aim for is for the student to be successful in common bullying or domestic violence situations. Maybe even an occasional bar fight or in extreme cases, a mugging. On that level, I do believe what I teach within the limited time frame allocated can be a good solution.

 

[chrispillertkd]

If you say so.

I thought it was a very elementary distinction.

Great. I'm waiting for the answer.

And I am awaiting any sort of evidence that you would take what I said objectively since you tend to disparage or belittle anyone that you don't care for.

It might be obvious to you, but not to me.

Well, of course it's obvious to me, Glenn, and to anyone who read the initial posts you made regarding my comments about the list you run and how I thought I was banned from it because I posted some questions but how, in fact, I was banned from it because I also subscribed to a list that was owned by someone you don't like.

You can believe whatever you want. I would just like to hear what you have to say about the issue at hand, something which I have spent time studying on my own.

Excellent.

Like I said before I read all of the published decisions, supreme court as well as circuit court, and a couple of district court cases. I'd like to see what your opinions are, and more importantly, the basis for those opinions.

Great. And I'd like to see any sort of evidence that you're interested in looking objectively at what someone who you have insulted says.

Should I do a google search on that?

If that is your preferred method of doing research on topics with which you're unfamiliar, feel free.

Pax,

Chris