"One Punch One Kill" Concept

[joesteph]

I think it's important to train powerful blows. If one could kill with one blow then you would also need to train self control which is the other end of the art.

Good point, Stone Crusher. I'm sure forum members are familiar with this "credo," but it bears repeating:

Build rather than destroy; Avoid rather than check; Check rather than hurt; Hurt rather than maim; Maim rather than kill; For all life is precious; Nor can any be replaced.

It's posted at http://www.harmoniousfist.com/the24elements.html

[NightOwl]

Hmmm-

There is an old saying in Arabic, "Trust in Allah, but tie your camel". I think a similar philosophy could be applied by karateka who follow the "One hit one kill" mindset.

[fallenyuyu]

I fully agree with stonecrusher because if you’re at the point where you can do the "one hit one kill" stuff, then you need to learn self control and know when to stop. However I would not rely on that mindset though, because in case you take a power shot and you miss, you would have some delay time in your reaction time and god forbid even hurt yourself. Never rely on the one hit one kill concept. Only take it if you are 102% sure you can hit the target and hopefully end the fight with that move otherwise don’t waste valuable energy.

[Kuma]

I think too many have taken it to mean that single techniques are the way to end the encounter. I always looked at it somewhere close to tallgeese, if your going to bother hitting something, hit hard. I always had it drilled into me to throw every technique like it was the last thing I was going to have the chance to do in a fight, even in combination. All you get is the jab, so jab hard straight and fast(and on target). All you get is the cross, so throw it hard, straight and fast etc.

This is my belief as well. In my opinion it's not so much as "one punch will end the fight" but "throw every punch in the hopes that it can end the fight". Make your strikes count and execute each of them powerfully, in other words.

[Seija]

“It is like a finger pointing to the moon.”

Some good points have been made so far but one thing has been missed. Striving to achieve something greater than yourself is how progress gets accomplished. So far, the comments have been focused on the finger and not what it points to. It wasn’t that many years ago that the world thought it was impossible to run a mile in under 4 minutes. It was through pushing the edge of human accomplishment and striving to achieve the “impossible” that we now regularly break the 4 minute mile. If you reach for the stars maybe you might at least catch a cloud. Or in other words; If you strive to obtain the impossible, at least you will always have goals to shoot for.

[Bushido-Ruach]

Many Karate Ka believe in this concept by training single hard blows against the Makiwara and by performing pre arranged sparing with single technqiue counters with strong Kiai's.

Do you think it is possible to always rely on this for a self defence situation. (I know it is possible to hit in the right places and cause serious damage, but who actually wants to hurt or kill people and get thrown in jail.)

Hi guys & gals...I don't think we really answered the question here...or at least one of the questions. Many believe in one-hit kills because they do exist - however difficult they may be to execute properly, they do still exist. However, most of them have very little to do with being able to hit with such force that you can break bones, its more a matter of practicing being able to hit in the right spot...and then practicing on being able to hit that spot on a moving target.

One-hit kills DO exist...a basic one is the temple or the middle of the forehead or the base of the skull...however, as someone so avidly recognized, you must be willing to suffer the consequences of utilizing such a technique - both in your own mind and any legal implications of applying deadly force if such force isn't deemed a necessity for self-defense situations.

Happy new year!!!

[joesteph]

(I know it is possible to hit in the right places and cause serious damage, but who actually wants to hurt or kill people and get thrown in jail. (emphasis added)

Hi guys & gals...I don't think we really answered the question here...or at least one of the questions. . . .

One-hit kills DO exist...a basic one is the temple or the middle of the forehead or the base of the skull...however, as someone so avidly recognized, you must be willing to suffer the consequences of utilizing such a technique - both in your own mind and any legal implications of applying deadly force if such force isn't deemed a necessity for self-defense situations. (emphasis added)

Since you returned to the OP, Bushido-Ruach, I think it's important that we re-examine the words I put into bold in both the OP and your posting.

That OP bold can be seen as "who wants to hurt/kill and be jailed for it" or "who wants to hurt/kill" and "who in his right mind wants to go to jail." I think it's the latter, that there are two questions here, and, looking back at your posting, I think you've treated it as two, referring to "in your own mind" separate from "legal implications." You've also got that very important caveat, "if such force isn't deemed a necessity."

Personally, I expand "kill" to "harm" and "maim." They can also weigh on the mind and/or have legal implications.

Let's limit the setting to one attacker, not multiple, to simplify. It isn't open season if someone accosts me. I have to size up the situation and determine the appropriate course of action. I may have to strike first, as his very accosting me can be considered an assault; it might be that he put a hand on me. Examining just what I've been exposed to as an orange belt, I can see that much of it is overkill. I suggest that if my opening counter to the hand on me (a joint lock that's supposed to break the wrist) doesn't do more than surprise and remove his hand from me, then I move into the next move(s) (e.g., the kick, then, if need be, the elbow strike I can perform according to the technique I used). If I break his wrist and he falls to the sidewalk in pain, I feel I'm obligated to stop right there. (I didn't say not to remain vigilant; I can remain so while I pull out my cell phone and call in the cavalry.) If he gets up and runs, I remember that I'm not a police officer, so I don't chase after him; instead, I report it.

I'm aware that I said, "I feel I'm obligated to stop right there," which is something that I'm commenting on regarding my own peace of mind, not legal ramifications. If my attacker is a larger man, reacting as I've described above, I say it holds true for me, for my mind. If he's larger (and I'm in middle age, so it's likely he's younger), I could likely legally "get away with" the additional kick and elbow strike, causing a lot of harm, but ought I? If I break his joint and he's still fighting, then that's another story; I'm fighting for my life and will have to continue with the technique.

When the police show up, they do not know what the situation was. It will be examined, and if I decided to maim or kill, the situation had better warrant it from both a moral and legal point of view.

[Adonis]

I take it as a philosophy to strive for in developing ones power in each strike, but reality is to develop also combinations becasue more often then not I believe that will end a confrontation from a physical stand point then one strike alone.

[Adonis]

One-hit kills DO exist...a basic one is the temple or the middle of the forehead or the base of the skull...however, as someone so avidly recognized, you must be willing to suffer the consequences of utilizing such a technique - both in your own mind and any legal implications of applying deadly force if such force isn't deemed a necessity for self-defense situations.

Happy new year!!!

I believe that was covered in the Orginal post about well placed strike, throat, temple ect.

[kungfumaste3]

I guess it would be cooler if its" One punch knock out" we dont want to kill people don't we?

I still play defense than offense.