Martial_Artist

JerryLove is correct. A gunshot wound will not likely result in death, or even in dropping the assailant. In fact, as stated, unless it is a central control system shot they can still run, shoot, or fight. I can cite modern gunfights(think the FBI fight in Miami). In a gunfight you fall to your highest level of training. So, unless you train to freeze, most likely you will not--barring, of course, individual psychological tendencies. Shooting a moving target with a handgun is a difficult feat. Errors commited by the shooter in inches result in misses by feet. An erratic, moving target, will most likely not be shot from a distance. Of course, turning your back on the gun and running will get you shot. If, however, there is distance, then avoidance is plausible, if not fully feasible. I think the statements should be, if someone is stupid enough to pull a gun on a well-training martial artist in close distance...fill in the blanks. Also, just plain submitting and hoping that a sociopathic criminal may find it in the goodness of his heart not to shoot you isn't bright either. Statistically, forcible, preferrably armed, resistance results in a lower rate of injury to the defender than by merely submitting to the attacker. In rape, for example, women who do not fight back are 1 in 3 more times likely to suffer serious injury. Women who fight back with guns are 1 in 7 times as likely. Additionally, 97% of rapes are unsuccessful against women who carry a firearm. Conversely, 85% of rapes are successful against women doing anything else, including running. The poll doesn't represent a complete range of possible courses of action, so I did not vote. For me defense is not an option. It is a must. How that defense is carried out depends entirely on the situation. If I do not need to engage a gun-wielding opponent to survive, then why would I? MA. p.s. Anyone carrying misconceptions about firearms should look into a few websites. https://www.fbi.org --> The Unified Crime Reports https://www.keepandbeararms.com -->The information bars on the right, GunFacts v3.2 https://www.us.doj.gov -->The US Department of Justice -->Criminal Statistics. There are lots of good information sites that cite facts not myth. I suggest investing some time and educating oneself.

Thanks Monkeygirl. Yes, I intended the father to be the one to carry the firearm. Primarily because, well, he is the dad. If he doesn't protect his family, who will? Well, about it being far too easy to hurt yourself or someone else with a gun...more people die from drownings, suicide, or just plain ole blunt weapons than from guns. I cannot answer for the mother, but I am a firm believer that good training can change people. If she had a gun and the training that should accompany it, then she would have been in a good position. Training primarily teaches not to shoot first and ask questions later. If anything, had she good training, she would have pointed the gun at her son and demanded that he identify himself. He would have realized his mother was at the door and replied, "Mom, it's me, don't shoot!" The situation would have been resolved. At least, if the training and the mother had gone well. In any case, I believe that firearms are a tool of self-defense and a good one. I also believe that the heads of households should have relative easy access to them for the protection of their loved ones. I do. Both my children understand firearms. That is the best safety available. Problem is, most accidents occur because of a lack of understanding about firearms. This is mostly the parents fault in not educating their children. I grew up around firearms of all flavors. Never once have I ever considered playing with one. I have always understood what a firearm is, as do my two boys. Anyways, I didn't mean to wander listlessly there. I understand why most people are wary of firearms, they can be a hard thing to understand. Not understanding something usually leads to not fully trusting it, either. I also find it admirable that we can discuss such a topic without getting hot-headed about it. Sansooer, I'm glad you have a father who knows how to take care of his family. I respect fathers who take that responsibilty, instead of abdicating it to an agency. MA.

911 would not have saved your lives. It's a good thing nothing bad happened to your family, and I'm extremely grateful that it was just your brother, but what if it had been an armed thug? Do you really think 911 would have saved your mother's life? Or the rest of your family's lives? Something to think about: The national average response time for 911 is 18 minutes. In 18 minutes, had it not been your brother, what do you think an armed thug could have done? Your Mom froze; that is a very scary situation. Especially since no one knows the mindset of a criminal. It is impossible to say what that person will do before they do it. My personal opinion of the matter is your Dad should own and learn to responsibly use a handgun. If it wasn't your brother then your family would have had a chance to save your mother's life. Your Dad could have drawn his weapon, called 911, moved your mother to safety, and waited for the police. If a thug were to try to attack you, then your Dad would have the advantage. If not, then you don't put yourself in any more danger while waiting for the police to arrive to clear the house. But it is a scary 18 minutes without a means of defending your family. Again, like I said, I am extremely grateful that it was just your brother. I don't like hearing of bad things happening to good people. But, think about it if it had gone wrong. It's an experience to learn from. You saw how your mother reacts in situations like this, so now you can prepare for such in case of a future situation. You know how you will react. And, now, you know something more about the reaction time of a police service call to 911. If it were me, I wouldn't take any chances with my family. MA. p.s. Monkeygirl is right. When your mother froze someone else, especially with training, should have acted. Most people when frozen with fear cannot hear ambient background sounds, they're focused on the target. Sometimes they can't even hear that. It's part of a chemical reaction in the human body for fight or flight. It's something to mentally prepare yourself for in yourself and in others.

Happy 4th of July.

It's Voldermort trying to possess you.

Legality issues. You'd better check with local regulations just to be sure. If possession alone is an offense then it's best not to make a pair. Which could come across even worse in the eyes of an over zealous DA. Find out your local laws, then ask again. If it's legal someone here might be able to help. MA.

The Body says surrender, but the spirit cries NEVER!

Velkom to da fourumz. Ve are zure you vill enjoy yourself...Muahahaha...

Well, BattleField 1942 is really good, but only if you have a really good internet connection, i.e. fast. There's Day of Defeat which is really fun. Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos is a good strategy game. It just came out with an expansion, Frozen Throne. Rainbow Six's latest is good. I mostly play Day of Defeat. It's just good old fun to wipe out all the Nazi's.

Yes.

OK, nice. What type of games do you like? First-person shooters, simulation games, strategy?

I have a nice scar from a spear stab to my lower abdomen. I have another scar from a knife slice on my forearm. I had four tendons in my right hand severed by a katana, which required surgery and therapy and I don't have 100% range of motion. Amazingly enough, I have only had my nose broken twice. I have a nice scar from an iron bar taken to my chin--luckily the hit wasn't too hard and didn't break the bone. I have a scar from a machete slice to my shin from when I lived in the Philippines, which required some jungle stitching. I've had one tooth broken. Aside from a slew of wonderful bruises, sprangs, scraps, and little cuts--I have some nice scars on my knuckles--I haven't been hurt that bad.

I would watch kids in the Philippines play DDR a couple years ago and, man...amazing. I stick to shooting games. I avoid situations where guaranteed and instant embarassment are certain. Unless, of course, I find the instant and equally intense need to impress my wife. Then, you may find me acting like a complete goon sometimes.

Yes. Stats.

I was born into it. Was doing it before I even knew what it was. Only in my latter years did I realize that not everyone did it.

Yes, but you have effectively removed any means of continuing the conversation based purely on a technical level. Stating extrenuating circumstance does not help in comparison of styles. Also, the focus of this thread, Art vs Art?!?! isn't about which style is better, you should read the previous threads, but about exposing a sting of logic that constantly finds itself contorted depending on the theme of a thread. Art vs Art?!?! was written to ask the question, if style doesn't matter, then why bother choosing an art, if all it does it falls upon the fighter? Well, obviously that argument cannot hold water. Because why did you choose the style you are taking over karate, tai chi, wing chun, muay thai, or any of the other styles? Because you feel that there are advantages to your art over another. Well, then there must be more to it than simply the fighter. Art must play a role. I really don't like repeating something I already spent time explaing. Really, you could already find discussion concerning your points of interest in the previous posts, and they will be in much greater detail than my simple review. That is the focus of this thread. If style means nothing and it is the fighter, why does it matter what style you choose? This question delves much into the rhetoric of the ancient rhetoricians and was meant to be the catalyst in self-questioning. It really is quite self evident. In fact, it was to some point even resolved. MA. ps. This thread is not about style vs style; about which one is better, but about discovering what underlies the principles concerning art vs art.

It's a weapon that works. But like all weapons isn't meant to be used for every single situation. If the opportunity presents itself for a backfist, then a backfist works. I have used it. It's just the same as almost any other technique. There is a time and place for its execution.

Pain is pain.

ROFLMAO

Shatter heel? Did he fall from a building? Did he have a brittle bone disorder? I have to admit, I haven't heard of a heel shattering before. It would go as I think Jerry wrote it, ankle, shin, heck even knee before the heel. It would take some strange circumstances to elicit that result. Talk about strange luck--err, bad luck.

Don't take this thread off topic.

Day of Defeat

Howdy.

It's who I am.