they generally dont cover the most important self defence skill: you can run.
Well.....running isnt self defense....its retreat.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
they generally dont cover the most important self defence skill: you can run.
That depends on whether he gives you a choice or not.So if an aggressive bloke approaches me, wanting to fight, engaging him is no longer self defense, it becomes consensual?
A side point - most of those videos don't appear to be self-defense. They look like consensual fights.
That depends on whether he gives you a choice or not.
Well.....running isnt self defense....its retreat.
Well.....running isnt self defense....its retreat.
who agrees to a fight,, ? generally after some sort of run in,someones says il punch your lights out, the other says, try it, so he does, and a fight happens, where was the agreement ?,Legally, there is a distinction in many jurisdictions. If you agree to the conflict, there has to be pretty serious escalation for a self-defense claim to be considered valid. In discussion, the distinction is pretty easy in a non-legal discussion at a high level, but harder in some cases. It comes down to this: If you agreed to fight someone when it would have been reasonably easy to NOT do that (in other words, they don't force the point by attacking against your will), then it's not self-defense.
It is action taken to defend your persons. So self defence fits, going back to there isn't a definitive definition for self defence.
So, if two people decide to step outside and fight, which is it?Nope, here it is either self defense, assault, or public disorder.
Not really. It's pretty descriptive. Just because you don't like some things some people say when talking about it, that doesn't invalidate the entire term.Because self defense is a meaningless word.
Weasel words are still the best description.
There's a fair amount of people deciding to "take it outside". Those clips included significant audiences that were cheering the combatants along.who agrees to a fight,, ? generally after some sort of run in,someones says il punch your lights out, the other says, try it, so he does, and a fight happens, where was the agreement ?,
uk laws doesn't require you to back down or try and leave if your being threatened, running twenty yard to get at him might take some explaining
quite possibly all three of thoseSo, if two people decide to step outside and fight, which is it?
The term "jiu-jitsu" (and the variants) is pretty vague. It's not really a single art, but a classification of arts.Karate was huge by the late 1970s. Various serious MA had been used by military forces for a long time (100 years?), but karate and the MA thing was a big trendy flash in North America. I recall an interview in some MA magazine, with a serving British military officer of a high enough rank to be interviewed for publication, and with some knowledge of the subject being queried. There had been a decade of high profile martial arts stuff going on said the interviewer; what was the British Army and their various specialist forces doing now in the way of training for unarmed combat?
The officer replied: "We have some of the best people in the world in that sort of thing, and we have done a fair bit of experimentation and study, and eventually we came back to military combat jiu-jitsu."
Mind you, "military combat jiu-jitsu" is usually meant not to "beat someone up," but to kill your opponent if possible or render him useless, unless a live capture is required, in which case they no doubt send in their top guys. Street fights aren't usually meant to kill, but jiu-jitsu can be modified so that the opponent does not die when hitting the pavement at high speed.
One thing about jiu-jitsu is that it is a "complete" SD system, so that you may specialize in the take-down, grappling, striking, or any other part of it if you wish. Mind you, the same can be said of a number of other Oriental martial arts.
If we use a definition of "defending yourself from harm against a physical attack", running counts. It's right on the margin even for that definition, but it is a way of avoiding that harm.Disagree. Running away is simply running away.
How does it become self-defense in that situation? I mean, without someone escalating by bringing a weapon, etc.quite possibly all three of those
what have they taken outside ? , their argument !,agreeing to go out for an arguments isn't the same as an agreement to fight, and people arguing seem unlikely to reach an agreement on a fight, how do they seal their agreement with a hand shake! .I fail to see what bystanders have to do with it ? nor any evidence any of those people were inside in the recent past.There's a fair amount of people deciding to "take it outside". Those clips included significant audiences that were cheering the combatants along.
as explained, as soon as one is in fear of his safety, an assault has occurred on him by the other one, then he can defend himself, then the police turn up and charge one or both with section 5 publicorders actHow does it become self-defense in that situation? I mean, without someone escalating by bringing a weapon, etc.
If we use a definition of "defending yourself from harm against a physical attack", running counts. It's right on the margin even for that definition, but it is a way of avoiding that harm.