![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#151
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
Or gets your face beat in. Or escalates matters. You don't honestly believe that you're always going to be able to beat up a bully, do you? You've been reading too many children's novels if you honestly believe that. You'll note in the example I gave it was a 15 year old girl that chased off a group of Neo Nazis by throwing a rock back at them. Why? Because for the most part, bullies want to prey on the weak, and they don't want people standing up to them. Let me say that again: yes, you can chase away bullies. The 15 year old girl in question was not a super ninja blackbelt with a .45 automatic... she was just a pretty normal 15 year old girl who stood up for herself and saved herself and the group she was with an INCREDIBLE amount of grief. Also, I have been in a grand total of one fight in my life. A bully cornered me with two solid stone walls to my back and threw a few punches (that didn't hurt at all). I kicked him once, he fell over... I hadn't hurt him mind you (no leverage, the kick was more of a shove with my foot) but he had fallen on his ass, and I walked away, and that was that. He never bothered me again. Bullies work on fear, they don't want people fighting back. Kicking them ends it. Seriously. Running away would mean he'd be back in the future. QUOTE Seen it. All I'll say is, if some of the abuse victims had tried to run instead of fight, some might still be with us today. ...are you freaking serious? Abuse victims that just run away or hide or whatever keep getting abused. Those that call the cops, get the help of friends, or otherwise fight back (even if it doesn't mean physically assaulting their abuser) do a heck of a lot better off. That's the only way to end it. Abusive relationships do NOT have a "just run away" option. They just don't. QUOTE See my response above. Standing and fighting when you have helpless victims present is stupid. You would run and leave your children behind? That's not only cowardly, that's sick and inhuman. Hell, I'd shove the kids to get them running and buy them time if that's the best I could do. Obviously if it's a simple mugging I'd hand over my money and that's that (the guy probably just wants drug money or something), but I would never NEVER run and leave a child behind unless I was running to draw them off or grab something to fight back with. Diffuse the situation? Absolutely. But abandon a child, especially my child? Dear god. JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#152
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,192 Joined: 6-May 07 From: Texas - The RGV Member No.: 11,613 ![]() |
You would run and leave your children behind? That's not only cowardly, that's sick and inhuman. Hell, I'd shove the kids to get them running and buy them time if that's the best I could do. Obviously if it's a simple mugging I'd hand over my money and that's that (the guy probably just wants drug money or something), but I would never NEVER run and leave a child behind unless I was running to draw them off or grab something to fight back with. Diffuse the situation? Absolutely. But abandon a child, especially my child? Dear god. Well, we have to give him points for honesty. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif) The worst part about his attitude, at least IMO, is the fact that while violent crime in the US is in decline (unlike it is in the UK and Australia. Cheers, lads!), the intensity of per-capita violent crime is on the rise. The chances of you getting shot/stabbed/raped/beaten/etc despite full compliance with your assailant(s) has risen quite markedly in the last 20 years or so. So, no. It's getting to the point to where it might really be a good idea to fight back 100% of the time, if you're capable... |
|
|
![]()
Post
#153
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE Also, I have been in a grand total of one fight in my life. A bully cornered me with two solid stone walls to my back and threw a few punches (that didn't hurt at all). I kicked him once, he fell over... So, not only do we have macho BS, we have people recommending that they follow the macho BS. Guess what? In the real world, sometimes the bullies win. In fact, they usually win, until you get a teacher or authority figure involved. Once a bully discovers he doesn't need to fear you, you've just made matters worse for yourself and everyone else. QUOTE Abuse victims that just run away or hide or whatever keep getting abused. Those that call the cops, get the help of friends, or otherwise fight back (even if it doesn't mean physically assaulting their abuser) do a heck of a lot better off. Run for help.... wow, isn't that EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG?! Took you a few posts, but at least you're seeing sense. QUOTE You would run and leave your children behind? I said, read my response above. Since you seem incapable of doing so, I'll quote it for you: QUOTE So, you'll stand and fight, exposing them to more danger as they now become nice hostages. You *all* run, and you all get away. If you stand and fight, there's a good chance that you'll become the hostage, and your family will come back to save you. If you run, and fight only as needed to make your escape, you'll be a lot better off. So, you *all* run away. You don't stand and fight, letting your children applaud you as you stupidly put them in even more danger. What kind of moron would honestly stand and pose, as if he were in an MMA ring? You tell your children to run, then you run right alongside them to make sure they stay safe. Anything else is worse than cowardice, it's cowardice hiding under so much macho BS that you'll deliberately expose your children to danger. You pissed me off with that line, so let me ask you what makes you think you're going to win that fight? What makes you think they won't not just beat your face in, but your wife and children as well. Congratulations, you've just caused grievous harm to your entire family, all because you were too full of yourself to run away. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#154
|
|
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 ![]() |
See, the problem we keep butting up against here is how most people don't suddenly attack their bully or whomever with a suicidal fight-till-I-die-bite-out-his-carotid-artery mentality, but that would help a lot.
In SR, if some NPC was beating the crap out of your player character, you could rationally go, "Hmm, whatever the odds of taking him down are, I gotta just go for it," and then you'd put full pool into your Unarmed Combat defense roll and if you got lucky you'd get some successes. But in real life such things as inhibition and fear and socialization come into play and a person never goes all out totally abandoning their own safety and continued living in order to take some bully down. In real life lots of people are rolling Unarmed Combat with no pool. For real. So of course the bully can PWN them. I think the key to success in these situations in real life is full pool to Unarmed Combat, and don't worry about soaking damage, but just let your BOD take care of that. For better or for worse, because ultimately isn't life a game? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#155
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
So, not only do we have macho BS, we have people recommending that they follow the macho BS. Guess what? In the real world, sometimes the bullies win. In fact, they usually win, until you get a teacher or authority figure involved. Once a bully discovers he doesn't need to fear you, you've just made matters worse for yourself and everyone else. What macho BS? I thought I made it clear that we're talking about a very stupid fight? The guy was throwing punches that didn't even hurt (because he didn't know how to fight) and I kicked him in a way that didn't hurt him either, just knocked him down. That's a pretty damn lame fight. Hardly macho, and hardly bragging, especially when I said that's the only fight I've ever been in. And yes, sometimes the bullies win. Sometimes you're too small to fight back. But sometimes the bully is someone you can beat. Your problem is that you're an extreamist. You're saying "this is always correct" and failing to recognize that sometimes it's wrong. Sometimes a bully is actually a good fighter and you can't beat him. But sometimes the bully is just a normal bully, and even fighting back is enough. Run for help.... wow, isn't that EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG?! Took you a few posts, but at least you're seeing sense. QUOTE I said, read my response above. Since you seem incapable of doing so, I'll quote it for you: So, you *all* run away. You don't stand and fight, letting your children applaud you as you stupidly put them in even more danger. What kind of moron would honestly stand and pose, as if he were in an MMA ring? You tell your children to run, then you run right alongside them to make sure they stay safe. Anything else is worse than cowardice, it's cowardice hiding under so much macho BS that you'll deliberately expose your children to danger. You all run away, the child has smaller legs, you've just killed your child. Sick. QUOTE You pissed me off with that line, so let me ask you what makes you think you're going to win that fight? What makes you think they won't not just beat your face in, but your wife and children as well. Congratulations, you've just caused grievous harm to your entire family, all because you were too full of yourself to run away. Even if you can't win, you've bought the kid time. Kids have small legs, they can't get away from an adult chasing them. If you've got some crazy psycho attacking you (schizophrenic?), and you try to run with your kids, they will catch your kid. If you make the kid run while fighting him, you're buying him time to get away. That's the point. Even if you can't beat the guy (and surely there are some guys you can't beat) you've given the kid a chance. Running is not always the answer. Sometimes it might be. Sometimes it's not. Running and leaving your kid to fend for himself is sick and twisted, since the kid will not be able to get away from an adult. Running from a bully that you could have fought off is foolish. Running from an abusive mate just means they'll get you later. Hell, running from someone trying to shoot you, unless you've got something to put between you and them... that's also pretty dumb. I'm not saying you should always fight... that's as foolish as saying you should always run. I'm saying sometimes fighting really is the best answer. JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#156
|
|
Freelance Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 ![]() |
QUOTE So, you'll stand and fight, exposing them to more danger as they now become nice hostages. You *all* run, and you all get away. The bolded part is the whole reason people are still disagreeing with you, dude. You keep saying "run = safety" and that just isn't always true. It's not as simple as "you all run, and you all get away," just like it's not always as simple as "you fight, and you win." It's somewhere in the fucking middle. Sometimes you run, sometimes you fight. It's entirely dependent on a million and one little factors that make any definitive statement complete and utter bullshit. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#157
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE What macho BS? "Yeah, I'm so cool, his punches didn't even hurt me." And based off of that, you assume all possible attackers are incapable of hurting you. Riiiight. QUOTE Sometimes a bully is actually a good fighter and you can't beat him. But sometimes the bully is just a normal bully, and even fighting back is enough. More often than not, that "normal bully" has been in more fights than you have, is larger and stronger, and knows how to hit. If you think all bullies are hot air, you've been reading too many Judy Blume novels. QUOTE You all run away, the child has smaller legs, you've just killed your child. Sick. I'm sick?! You're the one suggesting that you stand and fight in front of your children, so they can get killed in front of your own eyes because you were too stupid to run away with them. Did you actually *read* what I posted the last two times, or is the concept simply too difficult for you? You *all* run. You *all* get away, together. If one attacker catches up, you do the minimum needed to stop him, then keep running before the others catch up. "Sick" is the macho BS that gets his own kids killed because he won't risk looking bad. Is that you? QUOTE It's somewhere in the fucking middle. Sometimes you run, sometimes you fight. It's entirely dependent on a million and one little factors that make any definitive statement complete and utter bullshit. True. BUT: When you prepare for self-defense, you need a strategy, a path to victory. For example, a Jiu Jutsu stylist's strategy might be: "Take him to the ground". A striker's strategy might be: "Punch him until he stops". For the majority of people, who'll never develop effective fighting skills, their strategy needs to be: Run. Escape, retreat, whatever you want to call it-- they need to run away and get the hell out of there. I posted the rules before, but here they are again:
Fighting might be necessary, but only as much as it enables you to run. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#158
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
"Yeah, I'm so cool, his punches didn't even hurt me." And based off of that, you assume all possible attackers are incapable of hurting you. Riiiight. I did not at any time say anything close to that. I said that in the one fight I was in, the guy's punches did not hurt. I also said I didn't hurt him either (just knocked him down from a kick). His punches did not hurt because he wasn't actually any good at throwing punches, not because I was incredibly badass. You see, you've been projecting your own ideas onto everyone else, but they're far from the truth. At no point did I even imply that I was particularly cool, or super tough... in fact I was pretty clear about not being much of a fighter. You just wanted to believe that. QUOTE More often than not, that "normal bully" has been in more fights than you have, is larger and stronger, and knows how to hit. If you think all bullies are hot air, you've been reading too many Judy Blume novels. I have not read any Judy Blume novels. And yes, most bullies don't want to fight people who fight back. That would get them in serious danger. Some might be really big and super strong, but that seems in my experience to be pretty darn rare. QUOTE You *all* run. You *all* get away, together. If one attacker catches up, you do the minimum needed to stop him, then keep running before the others catch up. Children do not run as fast as adults... they are gaurenteed not to get away, the attacker WILL catch up. What do you suggest as a minimum needed to stop him, and why did you wait until you were in a worse position (having just run, then turned again... you're now less ready to fight or act) to do anything? If you're so on top of it that you can just do some minimal effort to check this guy, why not finish it and ensure the protection of those you love? And if he's nasty enough that you can't beat him, do you think some minimal effort will do anything useful? You don't go into a fight looking to do something minimal, and act consistantly like someone they can easily harm. QUOTE "Sick" is the macho BS that gets his own kids killed because he won't risk looking bad. Is that you? I suggested fighting even if you are sure to lose, if that's going to give your child a chance to flee. Is that about looking bad to you? Or is that about protecting someone else? I am not speaking from a position of machismo... that's entirely your misguided projection. I'm a pacifist, but also a realist. Since I've made it clear I'm not much of a fighter (again, one fight, against a guy who couldn't throw a punch effectively), I'm surely not showing off or being macho. So, readjust your concept of who you're arguing against instead of throwing out stealthy ad hominem (your argument is wrong because you're just trying to be macho) and start actually listen to what's being said. When a pacifist is telling you your position is too extreme, it's time to start reconsidering. I have to ask... have you been in any situations like this? Have you dealt with long term bullying? Have you dealt with abusive lovers? Have you ever actually been in a situation where physically protecting another becomes important? I've dealt with the first two, though not the third (thank goodness). I have also been in a situation where it was important to look tough enough not to be attacked (a small group of guys looking to start a fight... we outnumbered them slightly and as soon as it was clear we looked like we were ready to take them on, they quickly backed down). Have you actually personally been in situations like this? JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#159
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,408 Joined: 31-January 04 From: Reston VA, USA Member No.: 6,046 ![]() |
Since each person has been robotically restating their position for the last several pages, can we just agree that nobody's going to convince anyone else or change their opinion, and JUST MOVE ON?
My effort to change the subject: Striking vs Grappling styles. All [legitimate] styles have something to teach and are valuable to learn. But some styles fit certain situations better than others. Grappling styles may be better suited to subduing an opponent without leaving many marks. Considering that I've heard that most street fights end up on the ground, BJJ or similar grappling styles might be efficient. But when facing the possibility of more than one opponent grappling with one leaves you too exposed to all his friends, so against multiples a striking style like Muay Thai might be better. Does anyone have an opinion about which styles are good for most generic situations? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#160
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,192 Joined: 6-May 07 From: Texas - The RGV Member No.: 11,613 ![]() |
Since each person has been robotically restating their position for the last several pages, can we just agree that nobody's going to convince anyone else or change their opinion, and JUST MOVE ON? My effort to change the subject: Striking vs Grappling styles. All [legitimate] styles have something to teach and are valuable to learn. But some styles fit certain situations better than others. Grappling styles may be better suited to subduing an opponent without leaving many marks. Considering that I've heard that most street fights end up on the ground, BJJ or similar grappling styles might be efficient. But when facing the possibility of more than one opponent grappling with one leaves you too exposed to all his friends, so against multiples a striking style like Muay Thai might be better. Does anyone have an opinion about which styles are good for most generic situations? It has been my experience that correctly applied Glock-Fu has proven itself capable of solving the vast majority self-defense situations quite decisively. It has been effectively used for subdual, striking, and even situations outside of the usual distances generally described as "hand-to-hand". |
|
|
![]()
Post
#161
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE And yes, most bullies don't want to fight people who fight back. That would get them in serious danger. Some might be really big and super strong, but that seems in my experience to be pretty darn rare. You obviously haven't encountered many bullies. I'd love to see where you get your numbers on that, were you a bully as a kid and thus an expert on all bullies? QUOTE Children do not run as fast as adults... they are gaurenteed not to get away, the attacker WILL catch up. Kids have a nice turn of speed over the short haul, but that's besides the point. If you have your kids stand and watch, especially against multiple attackers, your kids will get hurt. If you all run away, you have a much better chance of escaping harm. You do the minimum, because if there's others chasing you, you cannot stop all of them from reaching your children if you're fighting. Run, fight, disengage, run. Standing to prove your machismo, and exposing your kids to danger, is what's sick. QUOTE I am not speaking from a position of machismo... that's entirely your misguided projection. I'm a pacifist, but also a realist. For such a pacifist, you brag a whole lot about your one fight. Enough to believe that your one fight is how every fight goes. That sounds a lot like machismo to me. QUOTE I have to ask... have you been in any situations like this? Have you dealt with long term bullying? Have you dealt with abusive lovers? Have you ever actually been in a situation where physically protecting another becomes important? I've dealt with the first two, though not the third (thank goodness). I have also been in a situation where it was important to look tough enough not to be attacked (a small group of guys looking to start a fight... we outnumbered them slightly and as soon as it was clear we looked like we were ready to take them on, they quickly backed down). Have you actually personally been in situations like this? See, to answer all that would make me guilty of macho BS. But since you asked, yes, I've dealt with all of those. Looking back, running would have been a smarter choice than fighting in every case. I've been bullied extensively in school, I've been an abuse victim, I've been in real fights, and I've been trained by some big names in martial arts (Jim DeMile, Patrick Strong directly, Dacascos Wun Hop Kuen Do indirectly, and seminars with Andy and Taky Kimura, Jesse Glover, Skip Hancock, among others). I've also trained numerous self-defense systems with dozens of instructors, inclulding Pankration and Krav Maga. Now that I'm guilty of machismo, I can tell you that just about every self-defense situation I've ever been in would have gone better if I had done more running instead of fighting. Fighting is the last resort. QUOTE Does anyone have an opinion about which styles are good for most generic situations? Running styles. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#162
|
|
Freelance Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 ![]() |
I posted the rules before, but here they are again:
Fighting might be necessary, but only as much as it enables you to run. But that's just it. They're not the rules. They're your rules. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#163
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 584 Joined: 15-April 06 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 8,466 ![]() |
Those are rules to die by. What a wonderfully suicidal viewpoint.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#164
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
Yeah, heck with it, Cain is far too entrenched in his extreme viewpoint, and nobody else is buying it. When I'm the one telling someone that they're too pacifistic, and they're telling me I'm being macho, that's SERIOUSLY saying something. Whatever.
Anyway, I think that FBI agent is very much a "real life adept" as it were. He was also documented at one point knocking on the door of a suspect's girlfriend's place, not realizing the guy was there and armed. The suspect opened the door with his gun pointed at the agent... who drew his weapon from his holster and shot the guy before he could fire. Improved Reflexes and improved pistols skill, I'd say. I have to say that the guy in the video that started this thread didn't seem as impressive to me as he was supposed to be, but that may be all my circus and gymnastics experience talking. JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#165
|
|
Freelance Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 ![]() |
Anyway, I think that FBI agent is very much a "real life adept" as it were. He was also documented at one point knocking on the door of a suspect's girlfriend's place, not realizing the guy was there and armed. The suspect opened the door with his gun pointed at the agent... who drew his weapon from his holster and shot the guy before he could fire. Improved Reflexes and improved pistols skill, I'd say. The bad guy actually had a gun in each hand pointed at the doorway, and Jelly shot the guy six times -- five hits, all in the head and neck, with the last round in his gun blowing up mattress because the bad guy'd started to slump over. So he's even more awesome than you just made him sound. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#166
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
Those are rules to die by. What a wonderfully suicidal viewpoint. And you have something better, I assume? Stand and fight and get your face beat in? QUOTE When I'm the one telling someone that they're too pacifistic, and they're telling me I'm being macho, that's SERIOUSLY saying something. You're the one advocating fighting multiple opponents while encouraging his children to stand there and watch. What else can I call it? Sick? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#167
|
|
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 ![]() |
Since each person has been robotically restating their position for the last several pages, can we just agree that nobody's going to convince anyone else or change their opinion, and JUST MOVE ON? My effort to change the subject: Striking vs Grappling styles. All [legitimate] styles have something to teach and are valuable to learn. But some styles fit certain situations better than others. Grappling styles may be better suited to subduing an opponent without leaving many marks. Considering that I've heard that most street fights end up on the ground, BJJ or similar grappling styles might be efficient. But when facing the possibility of more than one opponent grappling with one leaves you too exposed to all his friends, so against multiples a striking style like Muay Thai might be better. Does anyone have an opinion about which styles are good for most generic situations? Ooooh oooohh ooooh I wrote a thread about striking versus grappling a number of years ago. I hope you'll comment on it: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t=0#entry193785 |
|
|
![]()
Post
#168
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 584 Joined: 15-April 06 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 8,466 ![]() |
And you have something better, I assume? Stand and fight and get your face beat in? Actually it is called assessing a situation and responding appropriately to it, whether that is stand and fight, or run depends on the situation. Your adherence to one method "RUN!" suggests several possibilities. 1) You have no clue what you are talking about, 2) you think and wish to suggest to us that you are "NINJA MASTER" while accusing others of being high handed, 3) you have a desire to annoy the rest of the community by sticking to your guns where any person with the least ability to reason would realize the tunnel vision inherent in your position, 4) you want to prove your machismo quotient by beating yourself mercilessly against logic, 5) you want us to believe that you are capable of superhuman speed since to outrun bullets you have to be damn fast, 6) you want us to believe you have superhuman strength because that is what you would need to carry two kids and run away, or in this scenario you might have a Captain America superpower and be able to convince them that "Yes we can keep up with daddy!" and somehow they would, 7) through the magic power of running away you can walk through walls, walk on water, or behave like someone in the 36 Poles of Shaolin, or (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) you are developmentally challenged. My guess is it is a little bit of everything. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#169
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE Actually it is called assessing a situation and responding appropriately to it, whether that is stand and fight, or run depends on the situation. And, you'll note I've agreed with that on several occasions. HOWEVER: You still need a self-defense strategy. If you've studied theater, you'll understand the concept of a super-objective: your ultimate goal of the scene. In the case of self-defense, there is only one super-objective: get out of there, safely. In other words, run away. How you get to that super-objective varies based on many possible circumstances, but that needs to remain your overall strategy and primary goal. As far as kids go, do you honestly think you have the ability to stop even a single opponent and prevent him from hurting your kids? Your kids need to run, you need to run to set the example, and you only stop and fight long enough to keep him off your kid's backs. If there's multiple opponents, you have even less time to disable an attacker, since they can just bypass you and go straight for your kids. You want to talk about my issues, let's talk about yours. Why do you insist that running isn't the smartest and safest strategy, when dozens of martial arts instructors disagree with you? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#170
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 584 Joined: 15-April 06 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 8,466 ![]() |
You still need a self-defense strategy. If you've studied theater, you'll understand the concept of a super-objective: your ultimate goal of the scene. In the case of self-defense, there is only one super-objective: get out of there, safely. In other words, run away. How you get to that super-objective varies based on many possible circumstances, but that needs to remain your overall strategy and primary goal. Your super objective is to survive, and to do whatever is necessary to do so. Running or fighting are merely methods used to achieve your real objective which is to survive, preferably with the least number of negative affects. QUOTE As far as kids go, do you honestly think you have the ability to stop even a single opponent and prevent him from hurting your kids? No, I know so. QUOTE Your kids need to run, you need to run to set the example, and you only stop and fight long enough to keep him off your kid's backs. Your kids should have been trained by you as their father to respond properly. You will quickly outdistance them, while at the same time making yourself more vulnerable, especially if it is a close sudden encounter. QUOTE If there's multiple opponents, you have even less time to disable an attacker, since they can just bypass you and go straight for your kids. Assuming that you have decided running is the best action, which with two slower and scared noncombatants will rarely be the case. This is generally where you either would prefer a firearm or need to move quickly to a very close spot which will constrict their movement, hence limiting the number of attackers who can get past you or even at you. QUOTE You want to talk about my issues, let's talk about yours. Why do you insist that running isn't the smartest and safest strategy, when dozens of martial arts instructors disagree with you? Please cite all these wonderfully experienced individuals, I guarantee you their statements will have qualifiers. If they don't have qualifiers they are probably not worth listening to, so I could care less what they say. As to having problems, you are the one making a claim that one method of defense is a panacea for all potential confrontations and situations, no one else here is. The fact that you would press this point shows everyone here just how little you know on the subject matter. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#171
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
You're the one advocating fighting multiple opponents while encouraging his children to stand there and watch. What else can I call it? Sick? No, I'm the one who specifically advocated getting the kid to run while fighting whatever the threat was if necessary to buy time to ensure the kid escapes... without stating anything about multiple opponents. My objection was to the idea of running with the kid, thereby slowing yourself down and ensuring you will not get away unless you're able to both outrun the attacker and carry the kid at the same time... a macho feat indeed. Once again, you've made up your own version of my position which has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what I said. You've added in multiple opponents and specifically altered something I said. Strawman... and in fact an outright lie when you mentioned the part about encouraging the children to stand and watch, considering my earlier statements on the topic that were directly in opposition to your claim. Also, I don't believe I've stated my gender, though you've evidently assumed I am a large and powerful (and very macho) man, despite my comments about having not hurt the one opponent I've ever actually fought. Let me ask again, bringing up the first scenario I gave: The girl (15 years old, a friend of mine) had started hanging out with a group of goth kids at her high school in Germany. As they all went to the gym, a group of Neo Nazis started throwing rocks at them. The goth kids said to just run away, because those guys did it every day. They had been doing it for literally years. Her response was to throw a rock back, causing the Neo Nazis to scatter. They did not bother the group again. Now, was her action a show of macho BS? Would continuing to let them throw rocks at you every day for years (as the goth kids had done) and just running be the better action? If so, why? Why was her solution worse? Are you capable of comprehending the idea that running is not always the best solution? JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#172
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE Your super objective is to survive, and to do whatever is necessary to do so. Running or fighting are merely methods used to achieve your real objective which is to survive, preferably with the least number of negative affects. Of which, the best strategy is to get away. Staying in a dangerous situation is just stupid. QUOTE No, I know so. Now I know you're full of macho BS. You never know what an opponent is capable of. You're saying you can beat anyone, which amounts to the worst sort of machismo posturing in martial arts. QUOTE Your kids should have been trained by you as their father to respond properly. Your kids need to be trained to run, then; and you need to run with them to protect them. Worst case scenario: there's more of them around the corner, and you just sent your kids to their deaths. QUOTE Please cite all these wonderfully experienced individuals, I guarantee you their statements will have qualifiers. If they don't have qualifiers they are probably not worth listening to, so I could care less what they say. I've already cited some, more of them are retired. They'll qualify everything exactly the way I've said. But go to any self-defense instructor, and they'll tell you that at worst, you disable an attacker then run. At best, you run and avoid it in the first place. In every case, however, you run. QUOTE Are you capable of comprehending the idea that running is not always the best solution? The best strategy isn't always implementable, but that doesn't mean it's not the single best strategy. Always stick to your basics, and the basic strategy is to run. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#173
|
|
Freelance Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 ![]() |
No, the basic strategy is to remove yourself from a dangerous situation. Sometimes that means physically removing yourself and hoping whatever makes that situation dangerous doesn't give chase, or gives chase ineffectively. Sometimes that means removing whatever it is that is making a situation dangerous. Sometimes the latter is a perfectly viable option, though of course anyone who dares say so is swiftly labeled a slinger of macho bullshit by you.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#174
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 ![]() |
Exactly the point. The goal here is to increase your safety, and possibly the safety of others involved in the situation. Escaping for now might be exactly the thing to do... but it could also be an extremely foolish option (see the Neo Nazi group example above, which again was a real life thing). Sometimes you do need to make sure the threat doesn't come back, and sometimes (especially when there are others involved) you need to stop the source of the threat. Sometimes you're screwed and can't do either one. It's all situation dependent, and anyone who says any one method is always the best one is simply wrong. This includes people who say the best option is always to fight, and people who say the best option is always to run. It also applies to people who say the best solution is always to comply with what your attacker demands, by the way. All of these are valid options in specific scenarios, and each can be the best option given the appropriate situation. Random mugger with a knife wants your cash? Just give it to him. Angry drunk guy who's tough and looking to fight? Probably should get the heck out of the way as fast as possible. Long term harassing bullies, especially a group of such when you're in a group? Fighting (or at least demonstrating a willingness to do so) is probably the best option. Child in danger? Get the child clear safely in whatever way you can, usually by distracting the attacker (or taking him/her down if you can) while the child gets a chance to escape. You see someone else being seriously attacked? Call 911 (or your appropriate regional emergency number) and maintain a safe distance.
Lots of options for lots of situations. No one option is always best, and anyone who claims otherwise is downright ignorant of the situation. JaronK |
|
|
![]()
Post
#175
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
No, the basic strategy is to remove yourself from a dangerous situation. Sometimes that means physically removing yourself and hoping whatever makes that situation dangerous doesn't give chase, or gives chase ineffectively. Sometimes that means removing whatever it is that is making a situation dangerous. Sometimes the latter is a perfectly viable option, though of course anyone who dares say so is swiftly labeled a slinger of macho bullshit by you. We're saying the same thing, the difference is that I'm emphasizing what you usually only get a sentence or two of from a traditional martial arts class. Removing yourself from danger, aka running away, is the primary goal. Disabling an attacker is a possible step towards achieving that goal, one which may or may not be necessary. The slingers of macho BS are the ones who say fighting is generally the best option. QUOTE (see the Neo Nazi group example above, which again was a real life thing) Oh, for crying out loud, haven't you realized by now that neo-nazi's aren't bullies, they're bottom feeders? Let's assume you had a credible threat, like a group of schoolchildren. What would have happened was that things would have rapidly devolved into a rock-throwing war, resulting in your sister landing in the hospital with a concussion. Would that make you happier? Because that's the real-life scenario. QUOTE Long term harassing bullies, especially a group of such when you're in a group? Fighting (or at least demonstrating a willingness to do so) is probably the best option You obviously know nothing about bullies. Bullies are not mystical wimps who always fold when confronted. Usually, they're bigger, rougher kids with more experience fighting. I don't know what Never Land you come from, but the bully who folds in the face of opposition is a myth. QUOTE It's all situation dependent, and anyone who says any one method is always the best one is simply wrong. This includes people who say the best option is always to fight, and people who say the best option is always to run. The best option isn't always to run. The best option is to make it so you can run, then take that option. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th May 2025 - 12:15 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.