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.
That was hillarious- I almost bought that one... NyyyyycePhil your booklet is simply amazing, I have never in my entire life seen such an article for the common person to use in a SD stituation. This by far just proves how out of touch you really are with SD principle's in the real world. I just need to ask have you ever had any real type of training or does those TV shows and cartoon really keep you going so you can write these type of such.
I wish you would really go and train for a long period of time with someone that really knows something so you could see first hand what it takes to be proficent in areal SD type stituation.
I will let you go now so you can watch the next great movie so you can write another book. Best of luck to you.
It matters if you live in a state like Missouri......which has created civil immunity for anyone who uses CRIMINALLY justified force in defense of themselves or others.The fact that you are carrying a weapon shows premeditated intent to do bodily harm in any situation that you think may be justified.That will constitute that initial strike against you.I am not saying don't carry a weapon,I am saying in the eyes of the law using a weapon puts you at a legal disadvantage.It does not matter much what the law allows in your area,it matters how good the legal council is that the person you injure has.I am in favor of using whatever you need to defend yourself,but it will be much better for you legaly to use what you may find at hand when the situation arises rather than bring the weapon with you.
Tom Hodges
Justification as an absolute defense, when.
563.074. 1. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 563.016, a person who uses force as described in sections 563.031, 563.041, 563.046, 563.051, 563.056, and 563.061 is justified in using such force and such fact shall be an absolute defense to criminal prosecution or civil liability.
2. The court shall award attorney's fees, court costs, and all reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant has an absolute defense as provided in subsection 1 of this section.
poor guy
Personally i disagree with the use of any weapon - a weapon makes you weaker, somebody with the right training could easily disarm somebody with a nunchaku.
However i have been learning nunchaku for about half a year now - i have 3 sets
Foam with string - piece of crap
Oak with Chain - I dont like it to be honest its too wide on the grip
Oak with String - Love this one, its such a nice handle, and the fact there is no chain means when i do wristrolls (yeah freestyle i know) i don't pinch my skin in the chain.
Nowadays they just ain't practical - they are fairly useful in training, Hand eye coordination and also helps with multitasking in terms of doing multiple things at once (spinning, kicking, making sure you dont lose concentration, keeping an eye on your surroundings). Also theyre illegal nearly all over the world.
I also used mine for wrist rehabilitation (snapped my left wrist curling 26kg), and its helped quite alot i'd say. I have "sparred" with them before, my brother owns a set of Sai and we mess about occasionally, other than that the only real experience i have with hitting stuff is smashing light bulbs (5 and counting) and hitting punch bags with them.
But i would honestly reccommend anybody to get a set, not for practicalities of using them as a weapon, but for the hand eye coordination training and wrist strengthening (wood or heavy metal only though)
Unfourtunately phill, in order for your leaflet to be "textbook" you need to get some real nunchaku training.
A weapon makes you weaker? Man, someone should have told early man that when he fell out of the tree and picked up the first stick and rock.....he should have just practiced his empty hand! :sniper:
OK, square off unarmed with a knife wielding opponent (with malicious intent). Who do you think has the advantage? Same question with a bo, or escrima stick. Your position on this issue is naive, whether Bruce Lee supported it or not.... with a weapon in your hand, there is less freedom to do things and the heavier the weapon is the harder it will be to use, meaning that an unnarmed combatant would easily have the upper hand. (and i am not talking about guns here).
No need to be a sarcastic dork is there. I take it you don't read often, because various MA Authors such as Bruce Lee and Sifu Wong Kiew Kit (just off the top of my head) also suggest that weapons arn't as effective as Unarmed combat
@ Mark L
well, ok i'll use some of my real life experiences i'm a bouncer at a bar in town, and i've been threatened at knife point about 3 times so far (i've only been working for under a year). And every time i was able to lock the offenders arm and force him to release the knife.
You could say that "well they obviously didn't have any training", and that is probably true. But you said my thoughts are niave, i don't think they are considering i've faced the real deal.
@ Langenshwert
i didn't say "because they said it, it must be true". I said they "Suggest" that weapons arn't as effective, and i personally feel the same way. Please read my posts carefully next time![]()
There's plenty of need to be sarcastic if folks are spreading the silly notions that weapons aren't as effective as empty hands....notions that might get some one killed.....sarcasm is the surest cure for silliness.No need to be a sarcastic dork is there. I take it you don't read often, because various MA Authors such as Bruce Lee and Sifu Wong Kiew Kit (just off the top of my head) also suggest that weapons arn't as effective as Unarmed combat - with a weapon in your hand, there is less freedom to do things and the heavier the weapon is the harder it will be to use, meaning that an unnarmed combatant would easily have the upper hand. (and i am not talking about guns here).
I am also well aware of that police officer that developed nunchaku, and from my knowledge i understand they were popular for a short while - but they were too complicated to use for people.
The first book i ever read was "Dynamic Nunchaku" by Tadashi Yamashita, granted it is pretty ancient and the pictures are pretty funky, but if anybody who wants to start nunchaku its a fairly good read + you can tell right from the start of the book that the way phill has shown to grip his nunchaku is wrong. That Handling only works for pulling off spins and fancy tricks - which isn't much good for when somebody wants to attack you lol, can you seriosuly imagine going up to somebody and spinning a nunchaku above your head like in phills leaflet. Nunchak needs to be held on the lower half (personally i prefer nearer the bottom-middle gives more balance)
MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY! And for the record it's a misrepresentation of Bruce Lee's position to say that he claimed weapons were less effective than empty hands.OK, square off unarmed with a knife wielding opponent (with malicious intent). Who do you think has the advantage? Same question with a bo, or escrima stick. Your position on this issue is naive, whether Bruce Lee supported it or not.
Your conclusions based on your anecdotal experience is dangerous to your health because of the assumptions it has created....a false confidence NOT supported by reality.@ Mark L
well, ok i'll use some of my real life experiences i'm a bouncer at a bar in town, and i've been threatened at knife point about 3 times so far (i've only been working for under a year). And every time i was able to lock the offenders arm and force him to release the knife.
There is my real life experience, and my proof that i have had a little weapons training in terms of dealing with people with them. You could say that "well they obviously didn't have any training", and that is probably true. But you said my thoughts are niave, i don't think they are considering i've faced the real deal.
@ Langenshwert
i didn't say "because they said it, it must be true". I said they "Suggest" that weapons arn't as effective, and i personally feel the same way. Please read my posts carefully next time![]()
Absolutely! While we talk very much about the 'unarmed' skills of past warriors.....we forget that they were used very infrequently as most conflict was settled with a sword, or spear, or arrow, or club, or stick, etc, etc, etc,.....an unarmed man has almost ZERO chance against a trained armed man.....especially if he doesn't have the element of surprise.I read it perfectly well, thank-you.History bears out that weapons trump empty hand. If it didn't, then you would have found empty-handed soldiers defeating armed and armoured knights en masse on the battlefields of Europe, and the Roman Legions would have conquered using bareknuckle boxing, but they didn't. The grabbed sharp pointy things and butchered their enemies. Weapons are expensive... if they didn't work, no one would have expended the resources to develop them in the first place.
Best regards,
-Mark