Breaking necks

[Shorinryu Sensei]

Re multiples and armed opponents

 

Attempting something as difficult as breaking necks instead of the simpler and higher percentage moves and then escaping is very James bond and highly unrealistic.

 

James Bond-ish? well, you and I look at the arts differently. You view them as a sport (judging from previous posts you've made), whereas I'm a traditionalist and view them as a means of self-preservation foremost, also interesting, challenging and fun.

 

If I was in a situation as previously described against multiple attackers that I felt meant to kill me, or had weapons that could kill me...then I would use every dirty, nasty, mean and yes, deadly technique including breaking a neck that I have at my disposal. I would not go for the "knock them down and run" techniques, but rather I'd use the "rip their testicles off", "shred their knee ligaments to pieces", "gouge their eyeballs", "smash their throats"...and yes, break a neck if the opportunity presented itself. If it's a "Me or them" scenerio...I'm going to do whatever it takes to stop my opponent as quickly and effectively with the first or 2nd technique I toss at him so that he doesn't get up again. I don't want to have to deal with the same guy more than once if there's more than one.

 

But hey...I'm really a nice guy.

[STR33T GUY]

Shorinryu Sensei

 

While your using your killer instinct on attacker one, attackers two and three are stabbing you in the back.

 

Or

 

The prosecutor asks you why was it necessary to kill your attacker when he was on the ground and you had his back and the jury gives you that funny look.

[Shorin Ryuu]

You don't need to have someone in a completely locked or complex hold to break their neck. What's more, I would say you have more bang for your buck using these techniques with regards to success ratio when you talk about close in-fighting. Even if you don't break their neck, you can usually control them or completely render them incapable of attacking you by attacking that area. I feel my style in particular is oriented specifically for a crippling, fatal, or seriously injuring take down, especially including the manipulation of the head or neck. Rather than taking them down and immoblizing them, then breaking their neck (or whatever it was you were visualizing), it is meant to be done at once in a manner that leaves you relatively less vulnerable. These can be modified for other parts of the body, of course, but these techniques are far easier to pull off when you are not "being nice" or using it in the ring. As we said, these are only in situations where you don't have the option of being nice. We are only discussing a narrow range of possibilities here. Like Shorinryu Sensei said, it may be simpler to smash their throat. If someone intended to kill me and had the capability, you can bet they will probably have a vice grip centered on their windpipe rather than their whole neck.

[STR33T GUY]

Well I’m argued out.

 

If any of you deadly guys attempt a neck break in a self-defense situation and you are successful and you survive let me know. I’ll enjoy following your trial for murder.

[Davison]

I agree that if a neck breaking technique is in your ma arsenal,it should be kept secret to prevent younger,more impressionable students from trying to learn the technique. furthermore, how does anyone really train to break someones neck? Sure,you can go over a rehersed method of achiving this goal but unless you have broken someones neck before, you really don't know . It's a lot harder to break somebodys neck then you would think. The movies make it look soooo easy.If a technique is taught at someones dojo, the instructor teaches that technique because he has experience in useing that technique.I would hope that an instructor wouldn't teach somthing that he has no experience in. So that being said, how can an instructor teach a student how to break a human neck without actually ever breaking someones neck himself. It's all speculations if you ask me.

[GhostlySykanRyu]

"While your using your killer instinct on attacker one, attackers two and three are stabbing you in the back."

 

One wouldn't fare any better with "safer" techniques...you aren't really making a point here.

 

"The prosecutor asks you why was it necessary to kill your attacker when he was on the ground and you had his back and the jury gives you that funny look."

 

Who mentioned the ground? If theres more than one, ground grappling is foolish...

[MASIsshinryu]

Possible scenario:

 

Two heavily armed men enter a bank you are in, and separate all of the patrons present in a spaced out line along three walls so that you cannot talk to each other without being overheard. During the course of the robbery, they discover that they have botched the timing estimate on LE arrival, and find themselves now in a hostage situation. They move all furniture to a position in front of and blocking the lobby entrance.

 

Both of them announce that they are two-time felons, and will not be taken alive as they would be guaranteed life sentences. They begin shooting the hostages, starting with the person opposite your position, as they have nothing left to lose, and hope to force LE to comply with their request for safe passage.

 

You have one shooter walking along the line of hostages, while the other is in the center of the room. Both are facing away from you.

 

IF you can take the closer one, you have a chance of getting one of his weapons. If successful, you have a chance of taking the second one out. You cannot take the time to strip the extra weapons off of the first perp, nor would any person realisticly want to move past a person who may regain consciousness, and resume thier intention of killing those around them.

 

Your chances of success if you try? Slim.

 

Your chances of survival if you do nothing? None.

 

I would strongly consider breaking the first perps neck, to ensure that he does not wake up from a less-than-lethal strike, and to minimize the time spent on eliminating him.

 

There are many people in this world who are in the "Two-strikes" position, who will not hesitate to choose to kill to avoid a guaranteed life sentence. I choose to take that decision away from them. In any event, I would take the option that allows me to see my family again, even if it is while defending my actions in court.

[steve57]

Here in the UK the law states that you must only use a 'reasonable' amount of force whilst defending yourself against an unsolicited,gratuitous physical attack.

 

In a British court of law you would have a very hard time convincing twelve jurors that breaking another person's neck during a self-defence altercation was a 'reasonable' act.

[Shorinryu Sensei]

Shorinryu Sensei

 

While your using your killer instinct on attacker one, attackers two and three are stabbing you in the back.

 

Obviously you have no experience or training in dealing with multiple attackers. I'd suggest finding a different art and instructor. Also, I have no killer instinct. I don't even go hunting anymore. I have a strong self-preservation instinct however, and there is a HUGE difference.

The prosecutor asks you why was it necessary to kill your attacker when he was on the ground and you had his back and the jury gives you that funny look.

 

Did I say somewhere that I was going to kill someone while they were on the ground? That could be an option if the situation warranted it.

 

You appear to be arguing just for the sake of arguing, and your statements are getting weaker and weaker with each post. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the definition of a "troll"?

[Shorinryu Sensei]

Here in the UK the law states that you must only use a 'reasonable' amount of force whilst defending yourself against an unsolicited,gratuitous physical attack.

 

In a British court of law you would have a very hard time convincing twelve jurors that breaking another person's neck during a self-defence altercation was a 'reasonable' act.

 

Obviously laws will vary from place to place. Here, all I'd have to prove to a jury is that I was in fear for my life. When talking about multiple attackers, or anytime there is a deadly weapon involved (knife, gun, club, etc)...that is proof enough. Yes, you would possibly have to go to court, but generally if the police investigate the situation properly...especially if there are witness's, and they find that I was justified in believing that I was in danger of being killed...deadly force would be justified and I wouldn't spend more than a few days in jail waiting for the investigation t ofinish, then released.