I don't want to be a competitive fighter, I want to be a human killing machine. Which arts ?

[Xue Sheng]

Basically

Still lethal whether things are killed or not

 

[ShawnP]

Basically

Still lethal whether things are killed or not

I LOVE this, just made my day!

 

[Chris Parker]

So I should ask them if they sell cars? Do you know what a sociopath is? I didn't say psychopath.

Not really following you there… as you've quoted my entire post, I'm going to assume you're responding to my only comment about your previous post (that I would not suggest sending someone identified as a sociopath to a martial art school), yeah? Are you suggesting that all car salesmen are sociopaths? Or that only car salesmen are?

Seriously, this in no way addresses anything I said… and yes, I'm very well aware of what a sociopath is… and I never suggested you said psychopath… in fact, I go to pains to point out to the OP that he brought that term in himself. Would you like to try again, if there's something you would argue in my comments?

Martial art instructors don't have to identify sociopaths, they only have to identify people with the wrong attitude and wrong assumptions about martial arts.

This is not only not what I was saying, it's also patently incorrect. If you're going to have some kind of identification process for who you will teach, you need to be able to identify them in the first place… so yeah, you do have to identify sociopaths (which was the context of the comment at the time). As far as "wrong attitude and wrong assumptions", that can be corrected… sociopathic tendencies, not so much… hence your ideas being based in movie fantasy far more than reality.

I've seen my Sifu turn people away because their perception of what martial arts is was wrong. There are actually rules that my system follows that refers to what type of people we can teach the system to. It's the same rule that all of the Sifu follow. I've seen my Sifu turn people away.

Okay… many systems and schools have their own rules… some written, some not. But that's again not the point… the point was how you can tell that someone has these bad tendencies, sociopathic or whatever, when they come along to your school? Especially if they're polite, well dressed at the school, but when they get home, they abuse their family? How do you know?

Just like you didn't make any effort to tone down your statement about being the most "lethal human" people come to the school and say similar things and we turn them away.

Er… I think you're getting confused about who you're replying to there… besides which, a truly sociopathic person often wouldn't say such things… they're incredibly good at hiding intentions when it suits their purposes… so again, how could you tell? Are you saying you (and your sifu) rely on people telling them that they beat up their wives at night? That they enjoy torturing puppies? Really?

I can't stop someone from going somewhere else to learn a martial art technique for the purpose of being cruel, but I can decide if I teach that person or not. Just like I can't stop a criminal from going somewhere else to get a gun, but I can choose not to sell a gun to someone who I think shouldn't have one.

Look, your personal decision about who you teach has never been in question… the question was how can you tell who you wouldn't teach? How can you tell that this person, who appears so "normal" when you meet them, but is really hitting his kids each night, is someone you wouldn't teach? I'm not talking about if you find out down the track, but when they first come to talk about lessons.

I think the OP was being a little more tongue and cheek that you guys can handle.

Based on….?

I always joke with people that I can turn their child into a Killing machine. It's funny.

Okay, so because you've personally joked that you will turn children into killers, that means that the OP, who has gone to pains to confirm his phrasing in this and other threads, must have been joking as well? Really?

I'm also all about the cuddles.

The unfortunate thing about being a lethal human being is that you'd have to kill people to ascertain that, which is to be avoided if possible. Military applications aside, you'd never get a chance to find out. That would be a Good Thing (TM). Don't kill people, people are for living. ☺ Try not to hurt them either, it makes them sad.

Ha, agreed!

Funny thing is, some of the most potentially lethal folks around are sport martial artists. I wouldn't throw down with a good collegiate wrestler if I could avoid it.

Same… but, by the same token, I don't know that I'd necessarily consider them the most "lethal"… after all, would he be trying to kill me? Or just "beat" me? Personally, I consider people with weapons the most "potentially lethal" folks around… at least, from a physical capability standpoint… that said…

That's really not true.
I've got a Glock 19 on my hip right now. I do not need to shoot someone to know I can kill someone with it.
I've got a Benchmade Autostryker in my pocket. I do not need to stab someone to know I can kill someone with it.
I've got a me sitting in front of this computer. I do not need to kill someone to know I can do so.

Physical capability is one thing, mental and emotional capability is (thankfully) something else entirely. So, yeah, from my perspective, I don't know that I'd be sure about killing unless I'd faced that reality.

I prefer to stick with standard definitions:

Problem is that your "standard definition" doesn't really state that "potentially capable" is the actual definition… it states "sufficient to cause death"… in other words, a bullet is potentially lethal if fired… but if not, it's an inanimate object. A gunshot wound to the head, on the other hand, is likely to be lethal… being shot in the head is, indeed, sufficient to cause death… provided the location the bullet hits is on target. But, of course, until the person is killed, shooting someone in the head is simply "potentially lethal".

Given the right tools and training, any of us could be physically capable of lethal action, but how many, when push comes to shove, could enact? Given historical rates of fire, not many, unless subjected to sufficient conditioning.

Yep, agreed completely! Accounts from battlefields bear this out completely.

Again, even though I have never killed anyone, I know I am psychologically capable. Mr Mugger didn't survive because I held back.

How do you know? I've trained in systems that are specifically geared towards the mentality and mindset of committing to the action of killing your enemy… of acceptance of your own death in the process… and I have little idea of whether or not I'd be truly psychologically capable. I'm pretty sure I would be, but don't know how I'd handle it after the event… and, forgive me, but you train in TKD… so frankly, I fail to see how you've even started to address the realities of the situation.

And, honestly, the macho cavalier attitude displayed here I find somewhat distressing. You've worked as an ER nurse, Mark… I would have hoped that your attitude to death and killing… and being the cause of another's death… wouldn't have been so blasé. I mean… "Mr Mugger didn't survive because I held back."?? Really? I would hope that the reason "Mr Mugger" wasn't killed was because you were a rational, thinking, feeling human being who has problems with the very concept of ending another person's life… if that's not the case, frankly, I have nothing but pity for your attitude in this arena.

You do have to do an honest self evaluation, but your statement that you cannot know without actually killing is simply wrong.

No, it's actually not. There have been many who have been convinced that they could do something, but couldn't when it came down to it (include very well trained soldiers who should be able to kill… but freeze when it comes to it), or didn't think they could, but managed to. So the problem here becomes one of your "honest self evaluation"… the very concept of actually killing someone is something you can never truly give an honest self evaluation of…

Basically

Still lethal whether things are killed or not

Er… cute bear and all… but… no. If things aren't killed, then it's not lethal. Simply potentially lethal… or maybe "life-threatening"… or "dangerous"… Semantics and all, but hey… we might as well actually understand the words we're using.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Er… cute bear and all… but… no. If things aren't killed, then it's not lethal. Simply potentially lethal… or maybe "life-threatening"… or "dangerous"… Semantics and all, but hey… we might as well actually understand the words we're using

Tell that to the bear the next time you see one in the wild.... as for me..... whatever you want to go with...not worth arguing over

 

[RTKDCMB]

Tell that to the bear the next time you see one in the wild.

I am pretty sure that the bear will not care one way or the other.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I am pretty sure that the bear will not care one way or the other.

They never did when I saw them....luckily they didn't much care about me either... and they were Black bears not Grizzlies

 

[ShawnP]

They never did when I saw them....luckily they didn't much care about me either... and they were Black bears not Grizzlies

get too close to one in a bad mood or a momma with babies then you better be the one who cares, black bear or grizzly!

 

[JowGaWolf]

If you're going to have some kind of identification process for who you will teach, you need to be able to identify them in the first place… so yeah, you do have to identify sociopaths (which was the context of the comment at the time). As far as "wrong attitude and wrong assumptions", that can be corrected… sociopathic tendencies, not so much… hence your ideas being based in movie fantasy far more than reality.

Why would someone set up and identification process for something that they aren't qualified for? If you aren't qualified to identify sociopaths then why would you put that in your process for identifying students you want to teach?

It's far easier to identify people who have the wrong attitude and wrong assumptions about your martial arts. It's not up to the teacher to change the attitudes and wrong assumptions. That's entirely in the student's power. A person will only changer their attitude and assumptions if they want to. Just like I gave a real world example of how my Sifu rejected some student, yet some still think that what he's does is fantasy or "only in the movies"

I apologize for confusing you with the OP.

Look, your personal decision about who you teach has never been in question… the question was how can you tell who you wouldn't teach? How can you tell that this person, who appears so "normal" when you meet them, but is really hitting his kids each night, is someone you wouldn't teach?

How can I tell who I wouldn't teach? Easy, I wouldn't teach anyone that I thought wouldn't be a good addition to the school or a good example of what a Jow Ga Kung Fu student should be.

For example, A real world case. A students brings in a friend to take a trial class. The friend does the exercises but then sits down and refuses to try some of the basic kung movements for beginners. Both students and teacher try to encourage him to try and are supportive. The student still sits down. For me this student would be poison for the rest of the class. Kung Fu is already hard enough without the negative energy of "I quit", "I can't", "I won't try". This student didn't make the cut.

Another real world example. A potential student comes in and brags about what they know and how good they are in another system that has nothing to do with Jow Ga or learning Jow Ga. This person was asked not to come back.

When people come into a martial arts school they rarely hide their natural tendencies. If they come in lazy then they are usually lazy as a student. If they come in with the wrong attitude then they usually keep that attitude as a student. If they come in with the tough lethal human attitude, then they usually have that same attitude when they try to spar. Because for them it's about being the most dangerous and they think that means hitting fellow students as hard as they can. People who show characteristics that would interfere with the rest of the students learning are rarely hidden.

In my school it's not our goal to find out if someone is beating their wife, or if they are going to kill someone. Our only goal is to identify the right attitude and qualities that our system looks for in people. If you have a small amount of these qualities then you'll probably become a student and we'll help grow those qualities. If you have none of those qualities then most likely the person will be rejected or another martial art school will be recommended.

My experience with dealing with people who come to the school is that they rarely hide their attitudes and assumptions. If I don't see it in their face or hear it from the voice on the first visit, then I'll hear it or see within the first weak of class as they practice.

 

[drop bear]

Based on….?

Mostly what he wants to do with his killing machineness. Which is to protect people. He never even calimed to want to hurt anybody.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Mostly what he wants to do with his killing machineness. Which is to protect people. He never even calimed to want to hurt anybody.

There are a million ways to protect someone without fighting or being lethal. If someone wants to protect their family then they have to come to terms when the fact that they can't be around family 24/7 like a personal bodyguard. Then this turns into the realization that your family needs to know how protect themselves for when you aren't around.

When people want to protect their family, it's usually not from the standpoint of being "the most lethal human being known." Being a "lethal human being" means not many people are going to mess with me. It doesn't mean that they can't nor won't try to do something to my family.

 

[Tez3]

There are a million ways to protect someone without fighting or being lethal. If someone wants to protect their family then they have to come to terms when the fact that they can't be around family 24/7 like a personal bodyguard. Then this turns into the realization that your family needs to know how protect themselves for when you aren't around.

When people want to protect their family, it's usually not from the standpoint of being "the most lethal human being known." Being a "lethal human being" means not many people are going to mess with me. It doesn't mean that they can't nor won't try to do something to my family.

It can though bring about that 'gunfighter' mentality, where people want to challenge and bring down the one perceived as 'top dog', being labelled as a 'lethal killing machine' can be like pinning a target on your forehead. " So you think you're hard do you........"

 

[Dirty Dog]

Physical capability is one thing, mental and emotional capability is (thankfully) something else entirely. So, yeah, from my perspective, I don't know that I'd be sure about killing unless I'd faced that reality.

I have. Others here have. I'm not saying EVERYBODY knows, I'm saying the statement that you CANNOT know unless you've actually killed someone is false.

Problem is that your "standard definition" doesn't really state that "potentially capable" is the actual definition…

It's not my definition. If you have a problem with it, I suggest you take up with the people at Websters...

How do you know? I've trained in systems that are specifically geared towards the mentality and mindset of committing to the action of killing your enemy… of acceptance of your own death in the process… and I have little idea of whether or not I'd be truly psychologically capable. I'm pretty sure I would be, but don't know how I'd handle it after the event… and, forgive me, but you train in TKD… so frankly, I fail to see how you've even started to address the realities of the situation.

So now you're an expert both on what TKD teaches, and what I've personally trained and experienced?

And, honestly, the macho cavalier attitude displayed here I find somewhat distressing. You've worked as an ER nurse, Mark… I would have hoped that your attitude to death and killing… and being the cause of another's death… wouldn't have been so blasé. I mean… "Mr Mugger didn't survive because I held back."?? Really? I would hope that the reason "Mr Mugger" wasn't killed was because you were a rational, thinking, feeling human being who has problems with the very concept of ending another person's life… if that's not the case, frankly, I have nothing but pity for your attitude in this arena.

He stabbed me. I broke his neck. I certainly wasn't trying to keep him alive.
And I'm not blase', particularly. I'm realistic. If you're trying to kill me, I will do my best to make sure I do not end up dead.

 

[BTittel]

I hope your wish comes true so you get to see how truly awful being the "most deadly person that walked this earth" would truly be.
My advice would be look into your soul, sit by a running creek for a few days while you meditate on this decision.
But Good luck on your endeavors, and who knows maybe you could handle the talent.