Kai_Hwarang Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 I was reading up on how political/government laws restrict the use of Martial Arts in even what one would claim a "defensive" situation. Well, I would have argued some points, but they would be more from a Philosophical standpoint and they were speaking in a more realistic sense. Anyways, in my humble opinion there are "Natural Laws" to self defense, and are very general. Please debate if you feel otherwise, this is simply an opinion on my part: 1.) If one is practicing the Arts, one must abide by the rules of that art. This includes not attacking an opponent unless in self defense of ones body or self defense of ones loved one. 2.) A person who provokes you orally should never be the target of your self defense techniques. 3.) One who provokes you using soft physical contact should never be the target of your self defense unless warned first. For example: "Please do not push me again or I may have to defend myself." 4.) Never provoke the one wanting to fight you. Never tell them to come after you...never ask them to come after you...and never threaten them. 5.) If an opponent still wishes to fight and comes after you physically, try to put them down FIRST before causing bodily harm to them. Meaning...try to push them off...put them to the ground...and continue to warn them. 6.) If an opponent continues regardless of even those soft physical warnings...proceed to the next step and cause bodily harm as much as you think is necessary. 7.) In the wake of protecting a fellow loved one or peer...use soft physical force FIRST...if the action continues than proceed to bodily harm. If the attacker is vocally attacking a loved one or peer and they are unable to handle the situation...make yourself the target of the attackers agression. 8.) If the attacker has a weapon either run and seek help...or if unable to run and seek help, use EXTREME PHYSICAL FORCE or other means to get the weapon(s) out of the opponents grasp or physically disable them from using the weapon. 9.) Remain calm at all times in any situation! My 9 "Natural Laws" of self defense. It may make you look like a pansy...but these laws, IMO, should hold true to many of ya'lls Martial Rules within your arts and protect yourselves and your loved ones as needed. -Kai "One must train the mind before the body...for the mind controls the body..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorinryu Sensei Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 I can't find fault in what you're saying..sounds good to me! Maybe consider a #10---use only what force is necessary to stop the aggressor and to protect yourself or others from harm. I believe in most states that this is part of the definition of what the law allows you to do in a self defense situation. My nightly prayer..."Please, just let me win that PowerBall Jackpot just once. I'll prove to you that it won't change me!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martial_Artist Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 It's good and all, it's just that I haven't encountered such a structured fight since school. Every fight I've been in did not allow time for the luxuries allotted in your post. I was either flat-out attacked or flat-out attacked. Pushing? I think this really only happens between people that know each other or are fighting because of a disagreement. The traditional c*ckfight. With an attacker you do not know, or one solely intent on harm or 'robbery' you might not encounter them verbally assaulting you, then pushing you, then trying to hit you. Aside from that I really like 1,2,9,and 10. These govern our actions rather than reactions and that really is the place a martial artist wants to be...in the place of action. Good post. It's good to lget martial artists thinking about their actions before they actually have those experiences. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icetuete Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 i dont see anything to argue about in these rules, but "using the force that is necessary..." are difficult to apply. what is necessary to break someones arm? when threatened, the last thing I would think about is how not to hurt my opponent. e.g. in a dark alley, me alone and a guy. what is he up to? was that a knife in his hand? are there other dudes around? man - i am scared those rules look good in this forum and it'd be lovely if everybody would stick to them, but in that situation i would be glad if i could clam down enough to make use of my skills. i havent been in any fights outside the dojang and i dont want to change that. but i'd rather break his arm/hand/whatever so i can get away unharmed. and what should he do? go to the police and say "this son of a ***** broke my nose when i tried to get his money". just my opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iolair Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 I think "code of conduct" might be a better phrase than "natural laws". But, generally I think they're good - and if we could thrash out a code that settles out the areas we're not sure of, it could actually be useful in teaching/learning self-defence. I'm not sure about starting with a "soft response" before building up to a severe one. If I think someone really wants to hurt me, I'm not convinced it's sensible to push them away and see what they do next. They may flatten me before I have a chance for another action. Once (in my judgement) a physical attack (of whatever severity) seems inevitable, I should carry out sufficient (but not excessive) action to remove the threat... But not a light action and wait, which seems to be inviting injury. Currently: Kickboxing and variants.Previously: Karate (Seido, Shotokan, Seidokan), Ju Jitsu, Judo, Aikido, Fencing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icetuete Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 I'm not sure about starting with a "soft response" before building up to a severe one. If I think someone really wants to hurt me, I'm not convinced it's sensible to push them away and see what they do next. They may flatten me before I have a chance for another action. Once (in my judgement) a physical attack (of whatever severity) seems inevitable, I should carry out sufficient (but not excessive) action to remove the threat... i agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gheinisch Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Sounds pretty much what we are taught in our school. There are some gray areas but I agree with what your saying. "If your hand goes forth withhold your temper""If your temper goes forth withold your hand"-Gichin Funakoshi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryLove Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 OK. Someone has to play voice of dissent. 1) My art has no such rule... so I guess I can attack people willy-nilly. 2) Why not? Why don't words carry consequences? What if the provocation was "I'm gonna go get my gun and shoot your family"? Think you might react physically then? 3) Why not? Why would you even wait until he's touched you? What if he's half as good as you are and you are standing around talking when he starts kicking your butt. The fight is functionally over before you react. On-hit knockouts do happen and can be reasonbly reliable as sucker-punches... why are you waiting when a hostile person is in your space? 4) What if you want the fight but are stuck following rules 1,2, and 3? Getting him to swing first seems to give you some legal position (presuming the witnesses did not hear what you called his mother). The biggest problem is the conflict with rule 2. 5) Same problem as 3. He swings at you, you put him down gently, he shoots you with that gun you didn't notice... you should have put him out of commission. 6) Is a non-starter because it depends on 1-5. 7) Is redundant with 1-5. How do you know someone doesn't... I recommend "8" always be your approach... it is always mine. 9) Calm but angry... An aggressive mindset and bruning desire to tear someone's ******* head off will solve many flaws in position or technique. https://www.clearsilat.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotochem Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Hi Kai, #1,2,4&9 I have no problem with. #3 in my book even soft physical provokation would warrant a physical response on my part. Im not saying to give the person a crack in the face but a push or brush aside with a stern warning is in order. #5 if after the above #3 the opponent comes after me the gloves are off he will be dealt with swiftly and harshly. There is no warning needed as he obviously did not get the picture. #7 if someone tryed to hurt my wife or son or went toward them in a threatning manner with intent to do harm he will be deallt with the same as #5 above. I would tell the loved ones to run and get help while I insured they would get away safely. In real situations IMO there are no gentlemanly rules that a visicious predator will follow. If I have to deal with the legal ramifications, as long as my loved ones are safe so be it. Pain is only temporary, the memory of that pain lasts a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotochem Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 OMG!!!!! Im starting to think like JerryLove!!!!! HELP!!!! Pain is only temporary, the memory of that pain lasts a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts