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.
What role do weapons play to a warrior?
I haven't bothered to look at the videos, and from the informed comments of others here, glad I didn't. My experience is that these usually appeal to young, inexperienced, wanna be's who can be easily impressed.
But this first line of the post is worth exploring. One answer is that weapons increase the lethality and range of one's hand movements. Sometimes they follow the same hand motions as empty hand techniques, sometimes the motions are unique to the weapon. Usually, though, they do follow the same biomechanical principles.
Weapons can be defensive or offensive in design. Blades, while can be used defensively by a skilled user, are primarily offensive in nature. "The sword is not a tool to defend oneself with; it's purpose is to defeat the enemy." (paraphrasing from memory.) Bricks and rocks are limited in their defensive attributes. (Though as threats, can forestall possible attack.)
Pikes and long spears are standoff defensive weapons by design. Pepper spray and shields are also mainly defensive in nature, as is the jutte and to a lesser extent, the sai. I would say wood staffs such as the bo, as well as kali/escrima sticks, can be used for both.
Another role: A number of weapons, due to their mass, develop strength, especially in the arms. Due to required momentum generation they also strengthen the torso and develop sound biomechanics.
I have found that working with weapons improves one's concentration and penalizes carelessness. I have never kicked or elbowed myself, but do admit to ripping my side and banging my knee while using weapons. I know one fellow who shish-ka-bobbed himself with a sword. Weapons are dangerous and teach/deserve respect for their capabilities. They are seldom forgiving.
These are simply a few random thoughts on the subject that, hopefully, can turn this thread into something useful.
I notice firearms are absent from your post, though pepper spray, another modern weapon, is included. How would you classify a firearm?
If you're using a weapon as an equalizer, you're doing it wrong. You don't ever want the fight to be equal...
Facts. A US military officer once said that if our people are ever in a fair fight, their leadership has failed them.
Iāve been practicing with sharp swords for years. Never have I come close to shish- kebabing myself. How does one do that?I haven't bothered to look at the videos, and from the informed comments of others here, glad I didn't. My experience is that these usually appeal to young, inexperienced, wanna be's who can be easily impressed.
But this first line of the post is worth exploring. One answer is that weapons increase the lethality and range of one's hand movements. Sometimes they follow the same hand motions as empty hand techniques, sometimes the motions are unique to the weapon. Usually, though, they do follow the same biomechanical principles.
Weapons can be defensive or offensive in design. Blades, while can be used defensively by a skilled user, are primarily offensive in nature. "The sword is not a tool to defend oneself with; it's purpose is to defeat the enemy." (paraphrasing from memory.) Bricks and rocks are limited in their defensive attributes. (Though as threats, can forestall possible attack.)
Pikes and long spears are standoff defensive weapons by design. Pepper spray and shields are also mainly defensive in nature, as is the jutte and to a lesser extent, the sai. I would say wood staffs such as the bo, as well as kali/escrima sticks, can be used for both.
Another role: A number of weapons, due to their mass, develop strength, especially in the arms. Due to required momentum generation they also strengthen the torso and develop sound biomechanics.
I have found that working with weapons improves one's concentration and penalizes carelessness. I have never kicked or elbowed myself, but do admit to ripping my side and banging my knee while using weapons. I know one fellow who shish-ka-bobbed himself with a sword. Weapons are dangerous and teach/deserve respect for their capabilities. They are seldom forgiving.
These are simply a few random thoughts on the subject that, hopefully, can turn this thread into something useful.
Iāve been practicing with sharp swords for years. Never have I come close to shish- kebabing myself. How does one do that?
For this discussion, I define defensive as stopping an attack in progress and offensive as stopping the attacker, rendering him incapable of further attack. (of course, accomplishing the second also takes care of the first)
Most all long range weapons are offensive, meant to take someone down and out. Death is the expected outcome. One doesn't execute a kesa giri with a katana, or fire an army colt .45 just hoping to just wound an opponent and persuade him to go home. When drawing such weapons, we must assume the intent is to kill.
With defensive weapons, like pepper spray, the intent is to just persuade the attacker to go away, or give you time to get away.
One of the cardinal rules is to never ask a question, unless you're prepared to hear the answer. Perfect case in point.I dont know, could have been a good answer if you said it in a perfect French accent.
Let me rephrase then. You asked " what makes me more qualified to teach combatives?" I didn't say I was. But as was pointed out in another thread, I am not asking for feedback or a critique on my blog and web page.
I think the only reason he IS getting a hard time is exactly because he asked for it.
This is unnecessarily rude, and isn't very friendly.Put the weapons down. You have a little skill with the rope-dart, and you can do some tricks with nunchaku, but everything else was, simply, terrible. Take the video down, and do not represent yourself as being in a position to teach these weapons.
Which one? That's a good quote. Wondering if it's apocryphal or if someone actually said it.Facts. A US military officer once said that if our people are ever in a fair fight, their leadership has failed them.
This begs the question, if you are using overwhelming force, at what point is it no longer self defense?Fair fights are for tournaments. The proper answer to a real fight is overwhelming force.
Pretty much at the point where they no longer pose a threat. Overwhelming force isn't really an issue, IMO. I can use overwhelming force without ever having to injure someone if I outclass them enough. If I don't, that "overwhelming force" is just using everything that's necessary to survive, trying not to give up an opening they can use. You keep going until the threat is ended.This begs the question, if you are using overwhelming force, at what point is it no longer self defense?
Which one? That's a good quote. Wondering if it's apocryphal or if someone actually said it.
This begs the question, if you are using overwhelming force, at what point is it no longer self defense?
Makes sense, and I really appreciate the thoughtful answer. I can totally see your point where there are no weapons, or even where non-lethal weapons, are involved. In the case of most weapons, sharp ones, pointy ones, or ones that fire projectiles, overwhelming force is often pretty definitive, regardless of whether you are exercising sound judgement or not.Pretty much at the point where they no longer pose a threat. Overwhelming force isn't really an issue, IMO. I can use overwhelming force without ever having to injure someone if I outclass them enough. If I don't, that "overwhelming force" is just using everything that's necessary to survive, trying not to give up an opening they can use. You keep going until the threat is ended.
I think the distinction being made (carried from a military-oriented comment) was that you're looking for something to make it unfair in your favor, whatever that might be. I don't think the concept is foreign to competition, though rules and classing make an attempt to create fair-ish fights.
This begs the question, if you are using overwhelming force, at what point is it no longer self defense?
Makes sense, and I really appreciate the thoughtful answer. I can totally see your point where there are no weapons, or even where non-lethal weapons, are involved. In the case of most weapons, sharp ones, pointy ones, or ones that fire projectiles, overwhelming force is often pretty definitive, regardless of whether you are exercising sound judgement or not.
What prompted the question is actually something I heard about in the news just this morning. For the second time in a week, the Seattle PD shot and killed someone, and when I read the term "overwhelming force" it reminded me of how cops approach situations. And I have to say, sometimes it makes sense, and sometimes, it just seems like cops were the wrong tool for the job.
My point in bringing these two up is that when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. These are two very different situations, where in one a person ended up dead because cops got involved, not in spite of it. In other words, the cops engineered a "self defense" situation where they then used overwhelming force with a predictable outcome.
In my opinion, if your version of overwhelming force includes a gun, once you feel threatened, you will probably end up killing someone or being killed yourself. This is true whether you are right or wrong.