Karate Ni Sente Nashi-There is no first attack in Karate...

[DWx]

Ever wonder why pretty much every form (kata, hyung) starts with a block?

It will also depend on your interpretations of the moves in the forms. Is that a downward block, or a downward hammerfist strike to the groin? It just depends.

I think that depends on what style you do. For example, in ITF there isn't exactly much interpretation. Everything is defined right down to the exact degree your arm is bent, the distancing and the cm² you are connecting with. A low block must finish bent at 15° from the elbow so the fist would not be at the correct angle for a proper hammerfist. The way we perform the block means that path of the arm would also not be that suited for a downward strike. We have specifics like for forms but that's not to say you couldn't learn to adapt the motion so it is a strike.

Personally my whole philosphy is that the attack starts with the intention and not the physical motion. So I would always let the attacker "attack" first, be it through words, posture, attitude or whatever, but I wouldn't have a problem with throwing the first physical attack.

How would this concept work with something like Aikido or Tai Chi though? You'd have to let the attacker move first because otherwise how can you use their momentum?

[humble monk]

In my first form, I count six low blocks. If those are really hammerfists to the groin, then mine is a cruel, cruel art.

I have a new respect for the old "baby steps" forms now.

[bushido_man96]

Personally my whole philosphy is that the attack starts with the intention and not the physical motion. So I would always let the attacker "attack" first, be it through words, posture, attitude or whatever, but I wouldn't have a problem with throwing the first physical attack.

This, I would agree with. Good thoughts.

[bushido_man96]

Ever wonder why pretty much every form (kata, hyung) starts with a block?

It will also depend on your interpretations of the moves in the forms. Is that a downward block, or a downward hammerfist strike to the groin? It just depends.

I think that depends on what style you do. For example, in ITF there isn't exactly much interpretation. Everything is defined right down to the exact degree your arm is bent, the distancing and the cm² you are connecting with. A low block must finish bent at 15° from the elbow so the fist would not be at the correct angle for a proper hammerfist.

Stuart Anslow uses the down block as a hammerfist strike in some of his form applications in his book Ch'ang On Taekwon-do Hae Sul. That's one of the places that I have seen this application.

[Tiger1962]

Example situation: if someone on the street is calling me names and trying to provoke me verbally, I'm not going to strike first. That is, after all, what they WANT you to do. Can I hit someone for calling me names? LOL - I don't think so. I can deal with name calling.

But if someone raises their hands to hit me, and I see it coming, I'm certainly not going to stand there and allow them to hit me first. Now if they manage to get that first sucker punch in without me seeing it coming, well, guarantee you that my return punch will be felt.

[bushido_man96]

Example situation: if someone on the street is calling me names and trying to provoke me verbally, I'm not going to strike first.

I agree. It is important that we not get sucked into a provocation in this way.

But if someone raises their hands to hit me, and I see it coming, I'm certainly not going to stand there and allow them to hit me first. Now if they manage to get that first sucker punch in without me seeing it coming, well, guarantee you that my return punch will be felt.

This is what I want to avoid. I don't want to be punched first, at all. I don't even want them to have the chance to raise their hand in an attempt to attack. If I can derive from the verbal and physical clues that I think that this may happen, then I am going to act first, throw the first strike.

So, I believe that they have verbally attacked first.

[Tiger1962]

I understand why you feel that way but what I'm worried about is afterwards when the cops show up and if perhaps somehow it comes to light that I knew martial arts, I'm afraid that I'd be the one to automatically be cuffed & hauled away. I'm thinking that if someone hit me first, although I really wouldn't want that to happen, I can always claim self defense and me getting hit first would sure as heck tick me off enough to kick the crap out of them. My reasoning might not make total sense but what would you advise someone to do in a situation like this? Where, if you decide to strike first because you felt threatened, and let's say there was a witness standing by who relayed that to the cops, how could you avoid being the guilty one & getting arrested? I've always wondered about this.

[tallgeese]

The key is being able to articulate what you saw, why you reacted in the manner you did, and why it was needed.

You can't just throw out "he looked like he was going to hit me." It needs to be more like:

"Officer, after he verbally told me he was going to kick my tail, I saw him raise his hands to his head and then ball them into fists. He drew back with his right and shifted his stance in a manner which indicated to me that he was ready to throw a strike at me. He growled a little and then started to shift his weight forward, further indicating that he was iniating a strike at me. At this time, fearing for injury from the strike that would make me unable to further defend myslef, I preempted his strike with one of my own. I then used x attack to defeat his with the minial amount of force needed to contorl the situation. Then I called you."

Ok, it's only an example (don't take legal advice from me ) but it cover the bases. Anything that your attacker said to you, did in your presence, or anything that indicated him intent, needs to be remembered and passed on to the officers. The more detailed and professional you make it sound, the more likely that the cops will see your point of view. Of course, don't lie, this will always land you in more trouble. But make certain that you articulate everything that led to your decision to use preemptive action. Heck, do this anytime you're involved in a conflict and have to give an account. Always use the least amount of force needed to defend yourself. It dosn't mean you take weapons off the table, just that you use them all appropriatley, thats all.

[bushido_man96]

Tallgeese's post hits the nail on the head. It is a good way to articulate why you took the actions that you did.

I understand why you feel that way but what I'm worried about is afterwards when the cops show up and if perhaps somehow it comes to light that I knew martial arts, I'm afraid that I'd be the one to automatically be cuffed & hauled away.

And you may be. In some places, they will arrest both parties involved in a fight, usually for disorderly conduct. But, back at the station, you should be able to get the opportunity to speak with officers, and give them a verbal and written statement as to what occured. Your friends may also show up and do the same thing for your case. All of this will help.

I'm thinking that if someone hit me first, although I really wouldn't want that to happen, I can always claim self defense and me getting hit first would sure as heck tick me off enough to kick the crap out of them.

The problem with this rationale is that you assume you will get the opportunity to hit back. I don't know who turned the phrase, "Everyone has a plan, until they get hit in the mouth," but it has meaning, especially in a situation like this. His one attack may be enough to knock you out cold, and then, you could be at his mercy. Not a good spot to be in.

Where, if you decide to strike first because you felt threatened, and let's say there was a witness standing by who relayed that to the cops, how could you avoid being the guilty one & getting arrested? I've always wondered about this.

If there are witnesses around, then it is important to act the part of the victim. Keep your hands up, palms out, near your head, and make sure you say loudly and repeatedly something to the effect of "I don't want any trouble," or "I just want to go home," or anything of the like. When the attacker continues to press, look for signs of pending attack; face turns color, jaws clench, fists ball up, etc. If you see these things happening, then you can probably articulate the fact that you felt in "danger of great bodily harm from being struck." At that point, I would say preempt.

As for the choice of strike, it is really going to depend on what you are comfortable with. A palm heel strike into the chin is a good strike, and you can control the chin afterwards, and drive the person back and to the ground. From there, it is time to get away, and report the incident to the police.

[Shinta]

I believe it is not meant to be understood literally as a physical attack. It just says that it shouldn't be you the one who starts the fight or, in other words, the one who does something that lead to the fight.

Whereas when already fighting, there's no considering about being first or last - you just have to win.