AsenRG
#FuckWotC #PlayNonDnDGames
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2018
- Messages
- 17,250
- Reaction score
- 22,516
I find it curious how we're always talking about military when it comes to martial arts. Meanwhile, the actual techniques the military uses are almost always going to qualify as "excessive force" for a civilian.
Of course, if it ever comes down to a situation where such levels of force would be appropriate, you'd wish you'd focused more on those. But that's exceedingly unlikely.
Furthermore, the military, possibly excluding spies, has to train personnel to win. Their death might be more acceptable than retreat... and they're going to have weapons. At least their rifles, if they're out of bullets, and those make a far superior club than the shin kick.
But to a civilian, retreat is the preferable option. If anyone is attacking you in your house, come on, there are weapons everywhere in a modern house!
And then...."if it's unarmed 1 on 1" is a funny assumption, too. Because the really bad guys out there would laugh at us if they were reading this forum. If it involves them, it's not going to be unarmed.
Well, except on your side, if it depends on them.
As a guy with a turbulent past says on his site, in his old neighbourhood unarmed violence was for beating "people you don't consider a threat" (including "disciplining" women and children). Anyone that was a threat got the full treatment. And that included numbers, surprise, and weapons (and whatever other factors you can get on your side). Preferably as many of those as you can muster at once.
So yes, you can consider me to be training in unarmed applications for fun. The real application, to me, is either weapon-based, aims to let me deploy a weapon, or is immediately disabling. Whether this comes via a shot to the liver, a throw to the ground, or whatever, or me grabbing the nearest object...well, that's of secondary importance.
Of course, if it ever comes down to a situation where such levels of force would be appropriate, you'd wish you'd focused more on those. But that's exceedingly unlikely.
Furthermore, the military, possibly excluding spies, has to train personnel to win. Their death might be more acceptable than retreat... and they're going to have weapons. At least their rifles, if they're out of bullets, and those make a far superior club than the shin kick.
But to a civilian, retreat is the preferable option. If anyone is attacking you in your house, come on, there are weapons everywhere in a modern house!
And then...."if it's unarmed 1 on 1" is a funny assumption, too. Because the really bad guys out there would laugh at us if they were reading this forum. If it involves them, it's not going to be unarmed.
Well, except on your side, if it depends on them.
As a guy with a turbulent past says on his site, in his old neighbourhood unarmed violence was for beating "people you don't consider a threat" (including "disciplining" women and children). Anyone that was a threat got the full treatment. And that included numbers, surprise, and weapons (and whatever other factors you can get on your side). Preferably as many of those as you can muster at once.
So yes, you can consider me to be training in unarmed applications for fun. The real application, to me, is either weapon-based, aims to let me deploy a weapon, or is immediately disabling. Whether this comes via a shot to the liver, a throw to the ground, or whatever, or me grabbing the nearest object...well, that's of secondary importance.