The Saint Posted October 11, 2003 Posted October 11, 2003 Good post warp spider, I agree too "Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to go to his class." Choi, Hong Hi ITF Founder
Karateka Posted January 29, 2004 Posted January 29, 2004 All I know is, from what my Sensei told me, if you are in a situation where u have to defend yourself, your obligations is to stop the attack and run. Get out of the situation. If you are defending someone, get them out as well if you can, otherwise stay and defend them till its safe. If someguy comes to you and starts hitting you in the face with punches, you are not allowed to go and break his neck or his legs. You have to show JUSTIFIED force in dealing with each situation. Just like the police are supposed to. "Never hit a man while he's down; kick him, its easier"Sensei Ron Bagley (My Sensei)
Shorinryu Sensei Posted January 30, 2004 Posted January 30, 2004 We're getting a bit off subject here. As far as I know, the only place that has ever required black belts to register as "deadly weapons" is on the island of Okinawan a few years after WWII, and that was only for a short time. The reason they did this is because there were quite a few US Marines taking various karate classes, and there were many challenges being issued by them to other Mrines, resulting in beat up servicemen, which the military frowns upon. so in an attempt to to curtail this, they started the "registering your hands" thing..and it didn't work, and was later dropped. As far as I know, it has never been a law in the United States (can't speak for other countrys) and is just a popular myth that seems to keep perpetuating over the years. Now, as to the laws regarding self-defense, below is the law for Montana where I live, and all of the other states as far as I know, are similar in their wording and requirements for a self-defense situation. 45-3-102. Use of force in defense of person. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. I hope this helps. My nightly prayer..."Please, just let me win that PowerBall Jackpot just once. I'll prove to you that it won't change me!"
MichiganTKD Posted February 15, 2004 Posted February 15, 2004 It is my understanding, if my reading memory serves me correctly, that there was one city in the United States that tried to do this. I believe I remember reading (I don't remember where) that when karate first came to America following WWII, a city in Pennsylvania (may have been Pittsburg) tried to institute registering black belts as lethal weapons. They tried to do this because karate in America was new and noone knew what to make of it. I may be mistaken, but I think I remember reading about this. I'm not sure what became of the effort. My opinion-Welcome to it.
dragon29 Posted June 7, 2005 Posted June 7, 2005 I know that you don't have to register as a lethal weapon if your a blackbelt, but consider this: if a black belt punches someone, is it considered assault, or assault with a lethal weapon? Destroy all that is evil, so that all that is good may flourish.
UpTheIrons Posted June 8, 2005 Posted June 8, 2005 Anyone trained in a combative style is going to be held to a higher standard than a non practitioner. Not just in criminal court, but as far as civil action as well. The defendant's lawyers might very well claim that, as a trained fighter, you possess deadly abilities that the average person doesn't have. A gullible jury might very well buy it. Queen Padme: "So this is how Democracy dies-with thunderous applause."Annikin Skywalker: "You're either with me or against me!"Obi-won Kenobi: "That is the Way of the Sith!"
Sam Posted June 8, 2005 Posted June 8, 2005 Merriam Websters Dictionary of Law;The right to protect oneself against violence or threatened violence with whatever force or means are reasonably necessary.
EndlessDave Posted June 30, 2005 Posted June 30, 2005 I hear about this, I have seen it, is it right? Is it true? I remember at my old Martial Arts School people from the "Gov't" would stop in and collect the names of students that recived a blackbelt and they would have to sign some paper stating they were a lethal weapon and could not fight anywhere outside of the ring, mat or sanctioned event (being tournys or practicing in a dojo) If you did fight it would have to be total self defense with reasonable use of force. Meaning some guy swings and you put him in an armbar you cant brek his arm but you can try to talk him out of fighting etc..... Anyone else have incounters as these?No, black belts registering as lethal weapons is not real. Furthermore, those same restrictions that you mentioned above apply to everyone, not just trained fighters. Check out https://www.useofforce.us for an unofficial (but very informative) rundown of self defense laws in the US.
ShotokanKid Posted July 11, 2005 Posted July 11, 2005 I remember when I first got my black belt and some kid asked my sensei if I had to register at the police department and my sensei just said, "He's still the same person isn't he?"It's not like getting a black belt suddenly allows you to kill someone by touching them, or shotguns grow out of your fingers. "What we do in life, echoes in eternity.""We must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men."
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now