Navy SEAL advises Americans on whats best self defense/martial art to learn vs modern evil people

[bucs90]

This Navy SEAL is advising Americans who want to learn the best self defense/martial art they can learn to protect themselves from the evil psychos in society today. He gives some excellent advice.....





Buy a gun. Train with a gun. Conceal your gun. Get good with your gun. Repeat repeat repeat repeat. And then.....if you want more....train in Brazilian jiujitsu. Then maybe some basic boxing.

After knowing how to use a gun......


I would also say the Filipino martial arts........the specific arts that teach you how to use a knife......that is even on a higher level than BJJ..........

Yeah he talks about that too. Hopefully if attacked with a knife...you have a gun haha. Unless you're a cop....they don't deserve that right....they need to wrestle the knife away.

But if you have limited training time liken 99% have....I agree with him. Get the gun thing done first. Then....learn to grapple and box. Then add other weapon stuff in later.

I would disagree with you.....if you were a kid...yes....grappling and boxing. As an adult...you are most likely to face a violent attack from a criminal over someone in a bar. The criminal will be more likely to be willing to seriously injure or kill you.....and if they have any kind of a weapon......a club or a knife, you are at a serious disadvantage. The knife is the second best weapon you can have.........anyone who tries to attack you faces serious injury...and it increases the ability of the smaller, weaker individual to injure or kill and attacker.......but driving them off is even more likely.

I had a friend in my FMA class.....he was walking through and alley...which he really knew he shouldn't have done...when he was confronted by 4 men....3 from behind and one in the front.....he pulled a small knife out of his pocket and held it against his leg...telling them he just wanted to go on his way.......he said he could tell they were escalating to an attack because they just wouldn't leave and they kept goading him.....then, one of them saw the knife....told the others....and they backed off.....allowing him to leave....

If he did not have the knife they would have beaten the crap out of him.....Chicago was experiencing crimes against businessmen...they were being beaten and robbed by a group of men at the time.....that stopped when they attacked a bicycle messenger who used his bike lock to beat them back....

Oh I don't necessarily disagree with you. Your points are 100% right. I guess I just see FMA and BJJ as different as a lion vs a shark.

I've never done FMAs. Do you guys do a lot of ground stuff?? Like locking a limb that's holding the knife or sweeping an attacker on top?? Or full speed sparring with that?? I may be simply uninformed on it.

One thing I learned quick about BJJ is just how incredibly different sparring is when the opponent is going full speed.

I see the weapon martial arts almost like adding the weapons onto a battleship. BJJ and boxing are the powerful base that creates the ship. Add the weapons on after that's done.

Just my 2 cents though. Learning something....anything....is always better than learning nothing.

Try adding a knife to your grappling....start it without letting the other guy know you have a knife...the way a real knifer would work....it will open your eyes to the problem a knife presents in a real fight.

No argument from me there. We did exactly that drill at APD with fake knives. They have new ones with a plastic blade and metal edges that are a taser so it shocks when you get "cut".

Knives are nothing to fuck around with.

I've always looked at Martial Arts as 2 categories though. Armed vs Unarmed. A weapon changes the game. But...I also say if a person focuses too much on the comfort of having a weapon...it's risky if the weapon isn't there for some reason.

 

[bucs90]

Yeah he talks about that too. Hopefully if attacked with a knife...you have a gun haha. Unless you're a cop....they don't deserve that right....they need to wrestle the knife away.

But if you have limited training time liken 99% have....I agree with him. Get the gun thing done first. Then....learn to grapple and box. Then add other weapon stuff in later.

I would disagree with you.....if you were a kid...yes....grappling and boxing. As an adult...you are most likely to face a violent attack from a criminal over someone in a bar. The criminal will be more likely to be willing to seriously injure or kill you.....and if they have any kind of a weapon......a club or a knife, you are at a serious disadvantage. The knife is the second best weapon you can have.........anyone who tries to attack you faces serious injury...and it increases the ability of the smaller, weaker individual to injure or kill and attacker.......but driving them off is even more likely.

I had a friend in my FMA class.....he was walking through and alley...which he really knew he shouldn't have done...when he was confronted by 4 men....3 from behind and one in the front.....he pulled a small knife out of his pocket and held it against his leg...telling them he just wanted to go on his way.......he said he could tell they were escalating to an attack because they just wouldn't leave and they kept goading him.....then, one of them saw the knife....told the others....and they backed off.....allowing him to leave....

If he did not have the knife they would have beaten the crap out of him.....Chicago was experiencing crimes against businessmen...they were being beaten and robbed by a group of men at the time.....that stopped when they attacked a bicycle messenger who used his bike lock to beat them back....

I've been in a 3 to 1 confrontation. I'm strong, but not that strong. So I concentrated on the guy instigating the situation and told him that I'd probably go down....but I was taking his right eye with me. That everything I did was to take his eye. That he wouldn't leave the fight whole. He believed me.

After that, it became a lot of posturing and cursing. I walked out and not a single blow was thrown by anyone.

The best fight is the one you never have. You can avoid most with some situational awareness and common sense. You can talk your way out of most of the rest. You can run from more still. A fight you have to actually have to hurt someone in is a failure from the beginning.

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sorry....kicking is a poor choice.....to many chances that you will fall....

Depends on the kick.

If you want to take a bigger and stronger opponent out quickly, few moves work as well as a kick to the inside of the knee, destroying the ACL and cutting their foundation. Ankles and knees are particularly vulnerable and don't require changing your center of gravity radically.

Guns are not more likely to hurt you or your family....that is a myth. 1,500,000 times a year Americans use guns to stop violent attack and to save lives...most of the time no shots are even fired.

Guns are the best method of self defense in that it requires almost no physical strength, and criminals immediately recognize the danger they are in if they push the attack....while an 80 year old with Krav Maga training will not deter them......

Guns are the ONLY method of defense for the vast majority of Americans, which is precisely why Skyler and other leftists want to get rid of them.

A knight offering protection to a man with a shotgun is dealing with a farmer. A knight offering protection to an unarmed man is dealing with a serf.

 

[Skylar]

I would disagree with you.....if you were a kid...yes....grappling and boxing. As an adult...you are most likely to face a violent attack from a criminal over someone in a bar. The criminal will be more likely to be willing to seriously injure or kill you.....and if they have any kind of a weapon......a club or a knife, you are at a serious disadvantage. The knife is the second best weapon you can have.........anyone who tries to attack you faces serious injury...and it increases the ability of the smaller, weaker individual to injure or kill and attacker.......but driving them off is even more likely.

I had a friend in my FMA class.....he was walking through and alley...which he really knew he shouldn't have done...when he was confronted by 4 men....3 from behind and one in the front.....he pulled a small knife out of his pocket and held it against his leg...telling them he just wanted to go on his way.......he said he could tell they were escalating to an attack because they just wouldn't leave and they kept goading him.....then, one of them saw the knife....told the others....and they backed off.....allowing him to leave....

If he did not have the knife they would have beaten the crap out of him.....Chicago was experiencing crimes against businessmen...they were being beaten and robbed by a group of men at the time.....that stopped when they attacked a bicycle messenger who used his bike lock to beat them back....

I've been in a 3 to 1 confrontation. I'm strong, but not that strong. So I concentrated on the guy instigating the situation and told him that I'd probably go down....but I was taking his right eye with me. That everything I did was to take his eye. That he wouldn't leave the fight whole. He believed me.

After that, it became a lot of posturing and cursing. I walked out and not a single blow was thrown by anyone.

The best fight is the one you never have. You can avoid most with some situational awareness and common sense. You can talk your way out of most of the rest. You can run from more still. A fight you have to actually have to hurt someone in is a failure from the beginning.

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

 

[bucs90]

I've been in a 3 to 1 confrontation. I'm strong, but not that strong. So I concentrated on the guy instigating the situation and told him that I'd probably go down....but I was taking his right eye with me. That everything I did was to take his eye. That he wouldn't leave the fight whole. He believed me.

After that, it became a lot of posturing and cursing. I walked out and not a single blow was thrown by anyone.

The best fight is the one you never have. You can avoid most with some situational awareness and common sense. You can talk your way out of most of the rest. You can run from more still. A fight you have to actually have to hurt someone in is a failure from the beginning.

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Those arts are good. There's definitely value in being able to redirect an attack and use good footwork to avoid a direct assault.

I agree with you about most people overthinking it. Most attackers aren't trained and can be defeated or avoided with some basic boxing and aikido type stuff. Ill always say however that anyone serious about self defense should dabble in some ground work.

And most of the people who are highly skilled in stuff like jiujitsu and muay thai or boxing are that way because of years of discipline and dedication to the training....and thus....the humility and all that come with it....so they are most likely not the types out there attacking innocent people. So most people will never have to worry about out grappling a high level grappler, etc etc.

What worries me is youtube. A lot of morons are watching videos and figuring out some of these techniques and want to try to use them on people.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Boxing has two fundamental flaws;

1. Boxers are trained within the rules of the ring
2. Lack of kicks

MMA suffers from the first as well. I have no hesitation going after an instep, ankle, or knee. I don't fight by or care about ring rules and never trained to obey them.

I remember once we had a boxer come into the studio who had impressive hand moves. Quick and powerful jabs. Most of the top belts who would try to punch with him would get tagged. So this one burly guy, named Doug freaking charges the guy like a football tackle, bowled him over. He was good with jabs, but that was all he could do. Martial arts is mental, understand the strength and weakness of the opponent, leverage the weakness.

 

[Skylar]

Sorry....kicking is a poor choice.....to many chances that you will fall....

Depends on the kick.

If you want to take a bigger and stronger opponent out quickly, few moves work as well as a kick to the inside of the knee, destroying the ACL and cutting their foundation. Ankles and knees are particularly vulnerable and don't require changing your center of gravity radically.

Guns are not more likely to hurt you or your family....that is a myth. 1,500,000 times a year Americans use guns to stop violent attack and to save lives...most of the time no shots are even fired.

Guns are the best method of self defense in that it requires almost no physical strength, and criminals immediately recognize the danger they are in if they push the attack....while an 80 year old with Krav Maga training will not deter them......

Guns are the ONLY method of defense for the vast majority of Americans, which is precisely why Skyler and other leftists want to get rid of them.

A knight offering protection to a man with a shotgun is dealing with a farmer. A knight offering protection to an unarmed man is dealing with a serf.

When have I ever said I want to get rid of guns?

Feel free to quote me.

 

[Uncensored2008]

When have I ever said I want to get rid of guns?

Feel free to quote me.

Nah, I'm not going to go fetch. But you're no friend to civil rights; anyone in the forum more than 5 minutes is well aware of your positions.

 

[2aguy]

I've been in a 3 to 1 confrontation. I'm strong, but not that strong. So I concentrated on the guy instigating the situation and told him that I'd probably go down....but I was taking his right eye with me. That everything I did was to take his eye. That he wouldn't leave the fight whole. He believed me.

After that, it became a lot of posturing and cursing. I walked out and not a single blow was thrown by anyone.

The best fight is the one you never have. You can avoid most with some situational awareness and common sense. You can talk your way out of most of the rest. You can run from more still. A fight you have to actually have to hurt someone in is a failure from the beginning.

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Aikido is not meant for fighting.....it is meant for spiritual development...

Boxing is really good......mix that with some form of grappling.....and then throw in FMA.......a well rounded way to handle yourself......

 

[2aguy]

[

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Boxing has two fundamental flaws;

1. Boxers are trained within the rules of the ring
2. Lack of kicks

MMA suffers from the first as well. I have no hesitation going after an instep, ankle, or knee. I don't fight by or care about ring rules and never trained to obey them.

I remember once we had a boxer come into the studio who had impressive hand moves. Quick and powerful jabs. Most of the top belts who would try to punch with him would get tagged. So this one burly guy, named Doug freaking charges the guy like a football tackle, bowled him over. He was good with jabs, but that was all he could do. Martial arts is mental, understand the strength and weakness of the opponent, leverage the weakness.

Also, boxing doesn't do much to train your hands to hit without gloves......and hitting to the head is not advisable with the hands unless you are slapping......too easy to break them.

 

[bucs90]

[

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Boxing has two fundamental flaws;

1. Boxers are trained within the rules of the ring
2. Lack of kicks

MMA suffers from the first as well. I have no hesitation going after an instep, ankle, or knee. I don't fight by or care about ring rules and never trained to obey them.

I remember once we had a boxer come into the studio who had impressive hand moves. Quick and powerful jabs. Most of the top belts who would try to punch with him would get tagged. So this one burly guy, named Doug freaking charges the guy like a football tackle, bowled him over. He was good with jabs, but that was all he could do. Martial arts is mental, understand the strength and weakness of the opponent, leverage the weakness.

There's always been a huge debate about "ring rules" training and "reality fighting" martial arts.

I think the enormous value of training in the sport based martial arts is you can use them full speed vs a fully uncooperative opponent, so you really develop that fighting mentality, strength and conditioning of a fight. It's just flat out hard fighting a strong athletic person.

The flip side some say is these guys don't train bites, eye gouges, nut shots. But....how much do you really need to train that???


I will say as for kicks....I think they are way overrated especially the infamous knee kick. While my speciality is jiujitsu (11 years/brown belt)....I did kickboxing/MMA a while too and had my knee kicked many times and it never did anything except hurt the hell out of the other guys foot. They aim for the muscle mass to create the Charlie horse effect or get a takedown.

But to kick a knee and actually blow the knee out....truly takes a lot of power and some athleticism unless the person just has twig like weak legs. A kick in the nuts is far more effective.

 

[bucs90]

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Aikido is not meant for fighting.....it is meant for spiritual development...

Boxing is really good......mix that with some form of grappling.....and then throw in FMA.......a well rounded way to handle yourself......

I agree. If a person trained 3 nights a week and rotated between boxing, grappling and FMA...in about 2 years they'd be pretty much capable of defending themselves against most attackers.

 

[2aguy]

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Aikido is not meant for fighting.....it is meant for spiritual development...

Boxing is really good......mix that with some form of grappling.....and then throw in FMA.......a well rounded way to handle yourself......

I agree. If a person trained 3 nights a week and rotated between boxing, grappling and FMA...in about 2 years they'd be pretty much capable of defending themselves against most attackers.

And the thing is......a 60 year old, with a bad hip, no boxing, no MMA, no FMA.....and a few hours training with a gun.....is more lethal.......and can deal with multiple attackers,,,who are armed or unarmed....

that is the miracle of the gun.....and why man now has more freedom than ever before...

 

[Unkotare]

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Aikido is not meant for fighting.....it is meant for spiritual development...

Boxing is really good......mix that with some form of grappling.....and then throw in FMA.......a well rounded way to handle yourself......

I agree. If a person trained 3 nights a week and rotated between boxing, grappling and FMA...in about 2 years they'd be pretty much capable of defending themselves against most attackers.

It would still depend on the individual.

 

[2aguy]

No art teaches disengagment....that is outside of the Martial Arts. Walking away is always the best policy.....the first and best option. But you don't always set the rules....the attacker does.......

That's right. They teach to win the fight. Some do teach a tactical disengagement. Like boxing and jiujitsu teaching how to separate and create space in a tactical way to gain an advantage or escape a bad situation.

But the very definition of martial arts is "war arts".

When I say disengagement, I mean a martial art that focuses on creating space between your opponent and yourself. Aikidou, for example, teaches something very close to disengagement for the hand to hand and grappling moves. Philosophically its largely about redirecting energy around and away from yourself.

For the weapons training, not so much.

And boxing is powerful. A trained boxer can take apart almost anyone they meet. A lot of people overthink personal defense, imagining that they need some fancy moves or grappling techniques. Boxing has most of the fundamentals, minus a ground game.

For balance and form, I prefer Tai Chi. The slowness and rhythm are superb exercise and meditative. For fundamentals, shodokan karate. Its not flowery. Its a handful of core move practiced to perfection.

Aikido is not meant for fighting.....it is meant for spiritual development...

Boxing is really good......mix that with some form of grappling.....and then throw in FMA.......a well rounded way to handle yourself......

I agree. If a person trained 3 nights a week and rotated between boxing, grappling and FMA...in about 2 years they'd be pretty much capable of defending themselves against most attackers.

It would still depend on the individual.

It always does.

 

[Skylar]

When have I ever said I want to get rid of guns?

Feel free to quote me.

Nah, I'm not going to go fetch. But you're no friend to civil rights; anyone in the forum more than 5 minutes is well aware of your positions.

Well given you pulled that 'quote' sideways out of your ass, it shouldn't be hard for you to find the source.

Because its certainly not me.

 

[2aguy]

After knowing how to use a gun......


I would also say the Filipino martial arts........the specific arts that teach you how to use a knife......that is even on a higher level than BJJ..........

Yeah he talks about that too. Hopefully if attacked with a knife...you have a gun haha. Unless you're a cop....they don't deserve that right....they need to wrestle the knife away.

But if you have limited training time liken 99% have....I agree with him. Get the gun thing done first. Then....learn to grapple and box. Then add other weapon stuff in later.

I would disagree with you.....if you were a kid...yes....grappling and boxing. As an adult...you are most likely to face a violent attack from a criminal over someone in a bar. The criminal will be more likely to be willing to seriously injure or kill you.....and if they have any kind of a weapon......a club or a knife, you are at a serious disadvantage. The knife is the second best weapon you can have.........anyone who tries to attack you faces serious injury...and it increases the ability of the smaller, weaker individual to injure or kill and attacker.......but driving them off is even more likely.

I had a friend in my FMA class.....he was walking through and alley...which he really knew he shouldn't have done...when he was confronted by 4 men....3 from behind and one in the front.....he pulled a small knife out of his pocket and held it against his leg...telling them he just wanted to go on his way.......he said he could tell they were escalating to an attack because they just wouldn't leave and they kept goading him.....then, one of them saw the knife....told the others....and they backed off.....allowing him to leave....

If he did not have the knife they would have beaten the crap out of him.....Chicago was experiencing crimes against businessmen...they were being beaten and robbed by a group of men at the time.....that stopped when they attacked a bicycle messenger who used his bike lock to beat them back....

I've been in a 3 to 1 confrontation. I'm strong, but not that strong. So I concentrated on the guy instigating the situation and told him that I'd probably go down....but I was taking his right eye with me. That everything I did was to take his eye. That he wouldn't leave the fight whole. He believed me.

After that, it became a lot of posturing and cursing. I walked out and not a single blow was thrown by anyone.

The best fight is the one you never have. You can avoid most with some situational awareness and common sense. You can talk your way out of most of the rest. You can run from more still. A fight you have to actually have to hurt someone in is a failure from the beginning.

You are correct about that. It's always best to avoid a street fight. Even if it means coming off as the punk or pussy in the eyes of others.

Like you....I've had a couple brushes with it in my younger days when I went out to bars more often. I avoided them basically by just stroking the other dudes ego. Telling him I don't want him to hurt me....apologizing....making him feel big in front of his friends. In my mind...I knew I could destroy the poor guy. But for what??? I went to Waffle House with a hot chick afterwards and had a good night instead of going to jail or worse.

Its a bitter pill to swallow. But really hurting someone else is awful. For both of you. If I have to eat a little shit verbally to protect some young kid who wants to look big in front of his friends, I'll do it.

And the Navy Seal may recommend brazillian jujitsu....but he's coming from the perspective of the professional warrior. He is sent into battle to hurt the enemies of his country. Not to avoid battle. So his emphasis will be on what can do the most damage to the enemy. Proactively and offensively.

In civilian life you're not looking for conflict nor are you sent in to hurt the enemy. Your priority is not getting hurt and doing as little harm to others as possible. As there can be many legal and personal consequences to hurting others. It makes far more sense to train in a style that emphasizes disengagement. As avoidance is by far the smartest way to handle fights in the real world.

It seems to me that you think that guns are different......everything you say about stepping back from the fight, choosing not to fight.....applies just as much to someone carrying a gun for self defense.....just because you have a gun it doesn't take away your ability to step back from the fight.......

That is what you anti gunners always do....you just assume that if someone has a gun they are just itching to use it and kill.....and all the research shows that that is not the case...at all...

 

[Uncensored2008]

And the thing is......a 60 year old, with a bad hip, no boxing, no MMA, no FMA.....and a few hours training with a gun.....is more lethal.......and can deal with multiple attackers,,,who are armed or unarmed....

that is the miracle of the gun.....and why man now has more freedom than ever before...

"God made man, Sam Colt made em' equal." (Commonly attributed to Wyatt Earp)

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well given you pulled that 'quote' sideways out of your ass, it shouldn't be hard for you to find the source.

Because its certainly not me.

Since I didn't actually list a quote and just said you and the other leftists want to disarm the country, I'd say you are talking out of your ass.

Oh, you'd be willing to let people keep a single shot .22, as long as it's registered with the state and you're a party member in good standing? So that doesn't mean you really want to disarm others..

 

[Skylar]

Well given you pulled that 'quote' sideways out of your ass, it shouldn't be hard for you to find the source.

Because its certainly not me.

Since I didn't actually list a quote and just said you and the other leftists want to disarm the country, I'd say you are talking out of your ass.

Oh, you'd be willing to let people keep a single shot .22, as long as it's registered with the state and you're a party member in good standing? So that doesn't mean you really want to disarm others..

You attributed to me a position I've never taken. And can't back it up with jack shit. You can't quote me ever saying that I want to get rid of guns.

You literally hallucinated it as part of your own imagination.

And now you're adding to your blunder by making up more nonsense. Do any of us even need to be here for these delusional conversations you seem to be having with yourself?