Shorin Ryuu

I did read that link you supplied before I wrote my response to that post, and I must say it was quite interesting. At any rate, I'm just saying that even some members of the voting population aren't exactly what I would call responsible enough to determine the applicability of the law BEYOND that person's case, which is what is at stake here in terms of jury nullification in it's fully developed form, which is the angle I am addressing the issue from. Perhaps that is where we think we have a variance of opinion? I thought it was already pretty much obvious about the power of a jury over application of a law to individuals in certain cases (although the efforts of many people to go out of their way NOT to inform you of the necessarily full implications of it was something I wasn't really aware of). Granted, the members of the voting population are certainly more apt to be educated about issues than non-members, but there are still a huge demographic of ignorant voters out there...I support the right of everyone to vote, I just wish they would vote responsibly. Besides, in some places, jury selection may be a mixture of registered voters and driver's license holders, maybe just registered voters and in some places, only those that actually voted in the last presidential election. There is also a vast difference between registered voters and regular voters, in my mind (especially if you count the difference between "registered voters" and "people that actually exist" . This is surfacing on another issue altogether, but it shares my worry over what I had alluded to earlier, which is that of "mob" legislation. But, this in and of itself is pretty complicated. For example, if I was totally against it all, I would have a very harsh view of propositions, but I'm still sort of in the middle on that issue. Whatever. Great topic. I enjoy the debate (and the full and total hijacking of the thread).

I've had some of the standard military hand-to-hand combat training and compared my experiences with those in the Army, Navy and Marines and they all didn't seem that too spectacular. I've also wrestled with some of those people (including a Marine cop) and I wasn't too impressed either (not that they were bad, they just weren't the steely-eyed killing machines I had envisioned). As far as evasion/survival and all that, you've already had that specific part of training, I assume, as you're already a pilot (I'm not too up on all the Army stuff though). I'm biased, of course, but I would recommend that you find a good Shorin Ryu school and sort of explain your situation to the instructor. One of the biggest reasons why I like Shorin Ryu is because it is a mix of striking and grappling. A lot of teachers will use a little groundwork as well, which is important, but you have to remember that in a combat situation, you don't want to end up on the ground. It is good to be able to fight there if forced to, but very undesireable due to the likelihood of multiple attackers. But even in special ops training and that sort, a lot of the training is very simple, as much of the quickest and effective ways of disabling people are not quite as palatable to most people, even soldiers. One example is that sometimes oranges would be taped over the eyes of a partner and the other person would take his thumb and puncture/mutilate/etc. the orange, to simply get them less squeamish about really doing that to a person's eye in battle, which will incapacitate them sufficiently to do other things. I know quite a few Shorin Ryu karateka that used their training in combat, use their training in combat, or are currently employed in the "executive protection" business.

Well yeah, I was referring to them as an entity, not the actual institution themselves. I understand this part, but what makes this a huge problem is when the executive and the legislative branches are in cahoots, as it is the executive branch that appoints while the legislative branch approves. Not saying that this hasn't happened, but do you know of any examples where this has happened (passing oppressive laws, judges support them, etc.)? I simply do not know enough of judicial history, so I am curious. I mainly put that down because I, perhaps sharing the view of many in the judicial system, fear "mob" judicial review, which is what may end up happening in the case that people will abuse this power. See above. Of course, that is the nature of our system, where laws are left somewhat vague on purpose and the jury and judge are supposed to determine its applicability to a specific case. That's what I said, but I think you got bogged down in some of my prepositional phrasing that wasn't quite too clear. I agree in many courts this is true. This is all very interesting, I will have to ponder about all of this more. Are you by chance a libertarian? Anyway, so what do you think of Democrats challenging Ralph Nader in all the state ballots? What gets me about this is that this will have a HUGE, dramatic impact on absentee ballots since they waited until just recently to do this (far too close to the election deadline), all the absentee ballots sent to military members that had Nader on them will no longer be valid in those states that reject the legitimacy of his status. That means that new absentee ballots will not be sent back in time to military members overseas so they can return them before the deadline (and some governors, like in Philadelphia I think? Maybe it was Ohio...either way, a Democratic governor) are refusing to extend the deadline so military members can have their votes counted. This is what makes me more sick about manipulations of the judicial system. If they were really sincere about it, they would have challenged Nader much, much earlier, and not well past the standard overseas military 30 day limit processing time for all the absentee ballots...

Hmm, I've never looked at it that way. I've always seen the courts as not necessarily linked to the people because they are appointed rather than elected. Your statement is telling me that jury nullification can work around this structure, if I read you correctly. If anything, I've always thought the jury's responsibility was to determine whether or not a person was guilty within the confines of that law, not determine whether the law applied to that person. In my opinion, it is the role of the courts to determine the applicability/validity of a law, not the jury (hence necessarily the people in a direct manner). Because of this, I am a big fan of judicial restraint rather than judicial activism, which brings about the negative effects of the court system which you disparage.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill

Okay, but that doesn't change the fact that I already told him what "focused mind" was in Japanese on another thread. Edit: I only added this post just because I thought your comment was directed at me, tommarker (the one where you stated you had a reply on another thread, which I read). I never disparaged the fact that he was a blackbelt, if you looked at my posts in this topic. I was just genuinely curious about why he wanted to do it (as in was it an assignment from a teacher, a tournament, or just out of his own volition). The only reason why I said the things I did was simply as advice that there are a lot of things to consider when designing a kata, even in addition to specific bunkai. I stated things directly because I was being frank about my views on the matter.

I'm strongly worried about the fact that no one has mentioned Montesquieu's The Spirit of the Laws. Hint: The first two may have drawn a lot from this book. Edit: Just read your post again delta1. While I do cringe at your horrible command of the French language, I do commend you for pointing out that it wasn't the Constitution that gave us rights. We have these rights inherently rather than given to us on paper. As you said, the Constitution served as a limit on government. While we're talking about reading assignments, you should read Thucydides's History of the Pelopponesian War. Despite it being staged in Ancient Greece, it is still highly applicable. The Founding Fathers read it. Double Edit: Actually, its just called The Peloponnesian War...I posted that one rather late...

I already answered it indirectly on another thread, anyway.

I'm getting my master's degree.

Well, you can try. I just remember these words of wisdom one of my instructors used to say to me: "How do you make a small fortune teaching martial arts?" "Start with a large fortune."

I dunno, I was thinking of getting a purple with pink poka dots gi. You know, because it would be so cool.

No, but here's one that works. Stand in front of the opponent, grab his ear, and quickly drag him away. It seems to work for mothers.

Getting back to that naihanchi to the front...it is almost the same as naihanchi to the side in terms of overall form, but it begins to the front with a cat stance. A lot of the stances are facing a forty-five degree angle to either side and it is actually about twice as long as naihanchi shodan, as it is basically done twice. Obviously due to some changes in some of the stances and emphases, some of the techniques are slightly different, but someone familiar with naihanchi could learn it in a day (before people spam me, I said learn, not master).

I train under the instructor who owns that site about once or twice a week (he lives about 115 miles away). He's a real great guy. He's pretty modest (I thought the site was owned by Kyoshi Noujaim, but Kyoshi Noujaim is actually his instructor).

The book was "Bushido: The Way of the Samurai" by Tsunetomo Yamamoto That book is just what one of the translations of the Hagakure is called.

By some weird sort of chance, I learned Naihanchi to the front today...and I was pretty off on some of the stuff...I'll explain when I have more time.

I had an opportunity to handle some of the agena sai again. I'll probably ask to play around with them for about half an hour before I make the decision to buy some of my own. That being said, does anyone know of any significant differences between the carbon steel and the stainless steel versions?

Um, I don't think that is a plausible explanation for the origin of the sai, as the sai were used before the invention of the automobile. Now I have heard one theory where the sai was supposed to be the pin connecting wooden carts or something, but I am of the opinion that the sai was of Chinese origin and always used as a weapon on Okinawa rather than being modified from some sort of everday implement. Metal was pretty expensive on Okinawa...

Yeah, it starts to the front.

When I wrote this: "Sure, a superior sword may cut through another one, but that is more do specifically how you would block against a sword strike with another sword and how thin a katana is." I was referring to a sword against a sword ("sword" being the antecedent to "one"). I assume that is where the confusion is from, as my post did not really indicate that I thought a sword would cut through an iron sai (and hence your assumption that the sword is made of stronger material). If I was wrong, then that is just weird... As I mentioned and as Shorinryu Sensei more appropriately clarified, you wouldn't be bracing your sai against the full swing of a sword while blocking anyway. Perhaps you are just asking for the sake of prolonging discussion, so forgive me if I am repeating things you know anyway.

Erm...I guess. Like I said, I only saw it. I don't know it (they teach it at Doug Perry's dojo). I actually don't recall if it was all forward (every step forward for the first half of the kata) and all back, or every step right was forward, every step left was back, but it was something like that. I just remember it sticking out in my mind because earlier that day Doug Perry had just gone over some of the bunkai for the naihanchi kata and seeing it done to the front made it so much clearer. Sorry I couldn't be too much help...I'll have to learn it maybe next year (I might ask him if he doesn't mind me bumming at his dojo for another week or so next Spring).

I've gained a huge appreciation for naihanchi in the past half year. I've also seen a fascinating modification of it where it is down forwards and backwards as opposed to side to side.

I don't know if this is the right place to put this, but this is something I saw the other day... http://video.msn.com/video/p.htm?prepend=62378dec-21db-4afa-8f76-d68b6de855d6,919edacc-e319-4e0e-9e3c-fe95ad9901c1,e613af9a-776d-479c-93b4-d37a5667449b,799d30a7-724f-45a3-a62c-c6c8ca634ff6&autostart=0&menu=News&menuItem=NBC%20News If you have trouble with the link, click on the link that says "Karate joining Israelis, Palestinians". Left column, 9th one down. While I won't comment on the technical merits of it (hard to tell, seeing how the shots are of kids and for very short periods of time), it seems like a nice ideal. Edit: It may load an advertisement before the video loads, so don't worry if it doesn't show up right away.

Holy cow, Martial Man. Just speak in plain English. If you want to ask if the material/structure of the sai was not well suited against the material/structure of the sword, just say so. I've never seen the word "per" used so many times in so many differing situations... j/k ... I'm just giving you crap. I think it could be used against the sword. I was just saying it wasn't as common because more people would be likely to have a bo than a sword. Sure you might have the occasional rowdy Satsuma samurai, but it just seems to me that it would be more common for someone to attack with a staff than with a sword. Either way (since I am not basing the commonality of a bo vs. a sword off of anything reliable), it would be difficult for a a sword to cut through an iron sai. Like the kama, there is constant body change anyway, so it isn't as if you should be relying on the sai to prevent the sword from cutting you, in an ideal situation. Sure, a superior sword may cut through another one, but that is more do specifically how you would block against a sword strike with another sword and how thin a katana is.

Yes. It was more likely used against the bo thought. The bo was more of a common weapon back then.