One it already dangerous anyone with a knife. Two there many disadvantages with someone using a over hand down ward motion to stab you. Third I never said one was better than another technique. Fighting close is unpredictable at best so you just do what you think is the best at the time. The objective is control the arm with the knife.
Sure. I'll always run before I engage in a fight; the only circumstance where I wouldn't is if I'm in a corner or my loved ones are being threatened. I just don't see why such a risky move would be taught outside of competition and as self defense. There are so many other, safer alternatives that are much quicker and deadlier (guiding the knife down to the leg, 120 degree bent arm block, hyperextension, body bump the tip into the ribs, etc). My objective is to just sink that tip into his body so I can run and he can't chase me; I don't even really care about control or disarming after that. In my experience, getting that cut/thrust actually gives me the disarm because they're off center and it won't turn into a wrestling match now that they've been injured.
Lmao that's good. It's just this double handed elbow catch that gets me. There are plenty of techniques that technically work, it's just that there's also a spectrum that it's on where it also has more risk and takes more precious time to pull off than others. I want the fastest, deadliest, yet safest ones that can easily flow into each other, so that's just my stance on it.
Agree to disagree. Because having used wide range of techniques in real life I can say you aren't thinking what is better. You go for the one you feel comfortable using. I don't do and never done competition fighting. I fought because I had to until high school where I was pretty left alone.
Lol I wasn't saying that I think of the exact technique I'm going to use in the moment (which is why we do flows so that hesitation doesn't happen), I was just talking about the particular choice of technique sets that you learn in training. Of course there are dozens of possible moves to do, but I kinda just feel what I'm doing and that's why having fast + deadly techniques that can transition into each other (yay flows) are important to me. I just really, really don't wanna wrestle someone with a knife. Just stab and go xd
I was taught to disarm when ever possible. This way it view in self defense and not as the attacker. This has more to do with where I lived and how I view life.
Oh really? You can get in trouble for not disarming? Oof, what part of the world are you from? In the US, the use of deadly force is justified as long as the defender was in a situation where they couldn't retreat and they were in fear for their life.
Okay well I done with this pissing contest. Have fun killing people with your bad ads ninja ways
??? Where'd that come from? I thought we were just talking lol
No you keep telling and another person you can't get in trouble from going from defense to being the attacker. That far from true in every state I lived in. Even if that wasn't the case. Why would it be nessasarry to stab anyone when you disarm them. You are entitled to be the bad ass ninja you think you are. But reality is I rather disarm and end the conflict whole not looking like a threat to others. You assert that any technique that focuses on disarming is only taught for competitions. It not. It called minimum show of force. Most law enforcement and people are not going to view you as an attacker if you remove the object in question. Going beyond that and stabing a person is now crossing it. Before you go around thinking in the us that deadly force is justify would save you. In the state of california as told by police. If a robber breaks into your home and you have a way out. Deadly force is not justifed.
Whoa whoa WHOAAAA that is not what I said. I said that my first priority is always to run, and I will only act if I can't run or if the lives of my loved ones are threatened. I also said that disarming is not my first priority; I never once stated that it's only for competition. I said that I don't see why the double handed elbow catch would be taught for self defense outside of competition. I'm also from a military family, live in the state of California, and am friends with numerous law enforcement officers + am studying law. The retreat rule states to always run if the opportunity is present, but deadly force is justified if it is reasonable and prudent. Courts typically measure reasonableness based on the level of fear. Burglars can and do accuse you of assault / battery if you attack them (an officer would usually gauge whether it was self defense or battery in the investigation). However, self defense is another matter entirely. I've been in these trials before; I'm not just spewing it on the spot.
Lil Shirou
Honestly, right now your coming off as rude. I think that Cold was being reasonable and sayings thing like, "You are entitled to be the bad ass ninja you think you are," is not really helping
Whoa whoa WHOAAAA that is not what I said. I said that my first priority is always to run, and I will only act if I can't run or if the lives of my loved ones are threatened. I also said that disarming is not my first priority; I never once stated that it's only for competition. I said that I don't see why the double handed elbow catch would be taught for self defense outside of competition. I'mYes and yesterday you thought wecwere all mean to not allow a person with god abilities into the rp. Please stop
I'm not a mod but maybe we should stop continuing this discussion so thinfs don't get more heated.
Military is taught differently then actauly martial arts. They are taught to disable target in any means possible. I lived with police in California and you can say Ideally you would be right . But that not always the case
Lil Shirou
I listed several times this is my opinion. In which case. You quote I wouldn't do that I would stab them and run.
I know it's not always the case, but it's pretty hard to get wrongfully convicted. I'm not just saying that; the prosecution has to prove that you had a criminal state of mind (mens rea), that you did commit a crime (actus rea), and that there was a concurrence between criminal state of mind and action at the time of the crime. In other words, it's a lot of work. Wrongful convictions do happen, sure, but it is rare (I've already been in a few trials) and I'd rather secure my life first and worry later about the trial.
I literally asked you where you're from when you turned around and smacked me. Not that disagreement is even a reason to become aggressive; and I never said that my way is better than your's.
You go about your ninja ways "which wasnt an insult in any way by me . It a joke." and see how that works. Having lived in California and then Arizona you see how California law wouldn't protect you if you go more than minimum force. That base on police innteraction and that seen numerous of times people be charge going beyond that. It was not meant to be rude.
Like I said, I've already been in this situation before. California law fails to protect a chunk of self defense claims because that chunk usually isn't self defense. A lot of people beat the shit out of the attacker in rage, or continued when the attacker tried to get away. When interrogated, they gave justification for their anger and gave the prosecution the means to prove criminal state of mind. In my case where I've had to defend myself, it was legitimate and my trials never even went to court.
Wow you have issues this was not meant to be rude so get off that train
