Bank Employee Stops Thief

[Jiu-fu fighter]

I still think its pretty funny that Jubaji just does not stop his dissing and rude comments no matter how many people he pisses off

but I am in a good mood cause..





I saved 15% on my car insurance by switching to GEICO.
( sorry guys, could not help myself)

[Uke]

Jiu-fu

It is possible to close a 14 foot gap before a man can pull a concealed weapon. And if you catch him with his hand still reaching in his pocket you can take them down so much easier. Easy to prove for those who disagree, get a friend give him a toygun or knife to put in his pocket, go about fourteen paces away, tell him to scream i have a weapon and to go for it, see how quickly you can go right through him and take him down.

Jiu-fu, the ways that its possible to cover that much distance and have a chance of controlling the weapon arm is if the robber is either high on drugs, drunk, or has some disease like Parkinson's that inhibits his reflexes and movements.

Think about it. He's not going to yell "I have a weapon" if he hasn't already got it in hand. If he hasn't got the weapon in hand, that means that either he is scared and reluctant to pull it at all and hopes that the intimidation will be enough, or he simply doesn't have a weapon.

Once a normal healthy person has determined that you have designs on accosting him, you'll have trouble stopping him for just 6 feet away. If a gun is tucked into his waist line, it takes a lot more effort for you to close the six feet, let alone 14 feet, than it does for him to pull a pistol out of his own waist line. Reaction time has nothing to do with it from 14 feet away unless there are distractions involved.

Jiu-fu, I don't think anyone is judging the man. I know I'm not. We're speaking about his decision to risk every one's life when it wasn't necessary. Unless a criminal is irate or looks unbalanced and gives the impression that he's just a ticking bomb waiting to go off, people should stay out of the way. And so you know, I've been in those situations many times. The robbers only wanted what they could get and tried to get away, And in every case, the cops arrested them in less than 5 minutes.

Keep this in mind: Most people want fast cash. They don't want a murder charge that will send them away for 20+ years. They don't want to get into shoot outs and potentially kill a cop because in many states that's the death penalty.

Lately, there have been more and more robberies that don't even involve weapons. People are just handing tellers notes that contain threats. People usually don't want to complicate situations. That's why playing hero is one such variable that can push an already nervous and desperate criminal to shoot. Even if its by accident, a stray discharge doesn't discriminate.

[Tom Yum]

but I am in a good mood cause..

I saved 15% on my car insurance by switching to GEICO.
( sorry guys, could not help myself)

I call BS...

You're having a good day because its Friday and you've had a 3-martini lunch at the Pink Pussy Cat Cabaret...

[Uke]

i still think its pretty funny that uke talked about how using mma in the street would be irresponsible and dangerous, and then went on to recommend a move he saw on tv on mma as something to use on the street. that really puts an end to his argument and really shows that all he was doing was badmouthing mike b that whole time and others who train hard.

How is a slam or a face fall something I saw on tv? Do you even know what a face fall is and how it applies to what we're speaking about? Of course you don't. Its jujitsu, not some commercialized wrestling event manuever. So that instantly makes it beyond your comprehension.

BTW, that isn't how I'd deal with the triangle choke on the street. I'd stab you repeatedly. Then you'd realize how stupid you were for trying that outside of the ring before you pass out. No real RBSD practitioner here pretends that we seek to find empty hand. That's the job of kids like you who have been lulled into believing that "duking it out" is somehow cool. Ask Alex Gong how cool it is. If you ever put a triangle choke on someone with a knife, you WILL get the chance to ask him.

I would have loved for you to contribute something on that topic with Mike B, but you didn't because you knew that the moment you tried to step in the arena of discussing the arts you'd be exposed as nothing more than a child who wants to be seen and heard. Write something that makes sense or continue being a waste of everbody else's time. One could glance through a few of your posts, and all they'd find are YouTube links and ridiculous rantings that only make sense to you.

You don't have to like me, but at least write something pertaining to martial arts that makes sense.

[BoarSpear]

It is possible to close a 14 foot gap before a man can pull a concealed weapon.

Its also possible he will kill you for trying it. Point is you're ASSUMING you have higher skill levels than your opponent, thats always a bad idea.

I'll be first to admit an untrained person with a weapon isn't nearly as quick with their weapon and you may be able to get to them. But I don't base my training on surviving untrained idiots, nor do I treat unknown threats as incompetent on the street.

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

ok guys, when i start getting negative reps with snide references to the fact that i live in San Francisco, i move right along. hopefully by the time we meet in another thread you'll have realized i've been nothing but polite, and stated my opinions and why i have those opinions without insulting anyone.

[DickHardman]

How is a slam or a face fall something I saw on tv? Do you even know what a face fall is and how it applies to what we're speaking about? Of course you don't. Its jujitsu, not some commercialized wrestling event manuever. So that instantly makes it beyond your comprehension.

BTW, that isn't how I'd deal with the triangle choke on the street. I'd stab you repeatedly. Then you'd realize how stupid you were for trying that outside of the ring before you pass out. No real RBSD practitioner here pretends that we seek to find empty hand. That's the job of kids like you who have been lulled into believing that "duking it out" is somehow cool. Ask Alex Gong how cool it is. If you ever put a triangle choke on someone with a knife, you WILL get the chance to ask him.

I would have loved for you to contribute something on that topic with Mike B, but you didn't because you knew that the moment you tried to step in the arena of discussing the arts you'd be exposed as nothing more than a child who wants to be seen and heard. Write something that makes sense or continue being a waste of everbody else's time. One could glance through a few of your posts, and all they'd find are YouTube links and ridiculous rantings that only make sense to you.

You don't have to like me, but at least write something pertaining to martial arts that makes sense.

uke, i myself train in brazillian jiu jitsu and muay thai. i train in these arts seperately in hopes of mastering both individually instead of learning bits and pieces watered down, i do no train in mma nor am i a big fan of mma. however, i will say that my main reason for training is self defense. despite what you may think, i do not train in muay thai and jiu jitsu because i think they are the ultimate art or because they are even true "self defense" or combat oriented arts, which they are not. i admit, i often hear people in jiu jitsu class talking about moves based on how many points they will be able to score with it, which inmop is an ass backwards way of looking at things because i realize in the street there are no points/referee. however, who is to say that these people even care about self defense? not everyone does, alot of people do martial arts to look cool, get in shape, have a hobby etc. maybe all they are care about is competing so i cant really talk shit. however, myself and other people who are training for self defense purposes can use these sports arts to create effective delivery systems for ourselves, you know what i mean? i understand not everyone will be able to do this, but some of us can. before i started any training, i studied martial arts by reading books and articles on the internet so i could best decide what path to choose and what arts to pursue. i myself have stated that i wish i could train in a weapons art but i do not have access to one so for now i will work to master my empty handed skills because thats what is currently available to me, and i may as well get started on mastering the empty handed portion of my training. everyone has to start somewere. though i train in sport arts, im always armed with a pocket knife and kabuton. i realize the importance of weapons and the frequency of their use against victims. i have also realized how easily a weapon like a stick and knife can be combined with muay thai and its movements so in a self defense situation i too would not be be attempting to pull guard or triangle chokes in the street uke, even though thats probably what you assume i would do. i do train in newaza very hard though, because that too has many self defense applications when applied in the right way. like i said, while some guys on the matt are talking about how many points they can get with a move, there are those like me who are more worried about staying on top position and use bjj to learn how to escape from bad situations like having some guy grab you from behind, or when someone has you in mount. i guess the point is uke, you cant really generalize entire groups of people and some sport martial artists do really care about defending themselves. as a martial artist you shouldn't underestimate anyone, especially not someone who trains in a martial art.

[Uke]

DickHardman

Consider this:

The reputation of sport arts, which most TMA's are nowadays, is predicated upon how well they do in ideal situation like rings and mats. They're trained to respond to aggression in a sportive manner like exchanging and shooting-in. They won't hesitate to reproduce these methods on the street because they are accustomed to winning in this manner during kumite and randori, despite all the new variables that can now be introduced.

The reputation of combatives is predicated upon the knowledge that a single knife can be the equalizer of any empty hand skill, and so because of this combative practitioners are usually always armed, and their focus is on weapon attacks, weapon disarms and retention, and awareness for the highest of street level violence.

I don't think any of this is underestimating anyone or anything. The point that I have made over and over again is that everything has a place and a use. But it isn't until a man has this understanding that he is able to stop wishing for things to be as he would like them and begin to devote his energies towards the mastery of things as they are.

That has always been my point.

[BoarSpear]

Consider this:

The reputation of sport arts, which most TMA's are nowadays, is predicated upon how well they do in ideal situation like rings and mats. They're trained to respond to aggression in a sportive manner like exchanging and shooting-in. They won't hesitate to reproduce these methods on the street because they are accustomed to winning in this manner during kumite and randori, despite all the new variables that can now be introduced.

The reputation of combatives is predicated upon the knowledge that a single knife can be the equalizer of any empty hand skill, and so because of this combative practitioners are usually always armed, and their focus is on weapon attacks, weapon disarms and retention, and awareness for the highest of street level violence.

I don't think any of this is underestimating anyone or anything. The point that I have made over and over again is that everything has a place and a use. But it isn't until a man has this understanding that he is able to stop wishing for things to be as he would like them and begin to devote his energies towards the mastery of things as they are.

That has always been my point.

Well said!!

[DickHardman]

They won't hesitate to reproduce these methods on the street because they are accustomed to winning in this manner during kumite and randori, despite all the new variables that can now be introduced.

you are generalizing again. some people may do that, but some may not. we cant predict how people act.

[DickHardman]

The reputation of combatives is predicated upon the knowledge that a single knife can be the equalizer of any empty hand skill, and so because of this combative practitioners are usually always armed, and their focus is on weapon attacks, weapon disarms and retention, and awareness for the highest of street level violence.

its true that a knife is a great equalizer, however we also know that we cant use a knife in every situation. some situations will require less force. learning to use knives is great, but as you said everything has a place and use.

[Uke]

Its not a generalization. I mean no rudeness by this, but you are a victim of the school of thought that teaches that you can train and fight in the ring for years one way, and then all of a sudden change in less than 1 second to become educated in urban combatives.

Everything has its value. That has never been a point in contention. The issue is that some systems and skills are better suited for better situations. As far as combatives go, they were originally traditional martial arts that were stripped down and rebuilt to address the reality of violence as it occurs in today's urban environments. This task didn't happen overnight or even over a few years. They have been in development for decades and have never stopped evolving to meet the needs of a man who will face violence that involves weapons and multiple attackers. Over the years, systems have been refined to remain cutting edge. This would not be possible if the men doing it didn't understand one simple thing: The techniques in a systems are based on the concepts and methodologies that address street violence, not the other way around. That's a statement that most people on this forum haven't fully digested yet.

All in all, I believe that anyone trained in any combat way could be successful. I'm sure a man could use boxing and/or wrestling to survive an attack. Anything is possible. However, just because you can do something does not mean that its prudent to do so.

I'm sure a football player somewhere in the world has used a shoulder rush tackle to foil a mugging attempt. I'm sure a ballet dancer somewhere has thrown a high kick to defend themselves again a weapon. As I said, anything is possible, but not everything is safe and/or wise to attempt. You could argue that anything could work even though its meant and trained to be used within the confines of its own rules. I know masters of tae kwon do, capoeira, aikido, goju, shotokan and other traditional martial arts that are amazing fighters and could compete at the top levels of NHB. What do they all have in common though? They all have to be in professional level shape in order to be able to be effective with what they've learned. That's the difference. If they fall out of shape for whatever reason, all the years of training and dedication go out of the window. They still have better skills that non-trained fighters, but they aren't even 60% of what they were when they were in pro-level shape. Combatives doesn't require a man to live unrealistically. It addresses the fact that not every man who has a need to defend himself will be in the shape to throw a triple spinning kick found in tae kwon do. He won't be able to do handstands out on the pavement a spin into wheel kicks like you see in capoeira. As you pointed out, most won't be out there picking men up off the ground to powerbomb them. Those are sportive methods that don't teach you to maximize your tools. They teach you to display toughness and exert a lot of energy while attempting to pace yourself. You would have to spend 10-20 years achieving a level of athleticism in capoeira, tae kwon do or boxing just to defend yourself in weapon or multiple attack situations. In top level combatives, you're learning how to defend against blades, firearms and several attackers on your first day. You'd have a higher degree of understanding to survive street violence within 6 months of combatives as opposed to 5 years of training in MMA or other sportive arts.

Sport combat would get you in better shape than most people who don't train. It would give you better tools to work with than the average guy. But it would also program you to go into real and dangerous situations with the same approach as you would in the ring or mat, which wouldn't be far from reckless abandon. And that isn't an insult, only an accurate statement meant to reflect how unprepared sport arts leave their students for reality level violence.

My stance has always been that combatives exist for a reason. I find it interesting that many MMA advocates direct their arguments toward the military, when it was in the military that combatives were born. However as time went on, vicious hand to hand tactics were deemed too "brutal and unnecessary". The reality of warfare became firearms and munitions, and the savage fighting styles of WWII quickly began to fade out of all but the most dedicated circles.

People found a fascination with Kano's watered down randori-based judo and modern yet watered down karate. Soon, the birth of McDojo's came about, and the whoring of arts became a free for all. After a while, it became a joke to tell someone you were a black belt.

You may believe what you want to, but reality isn't what you say it is. It is what it is. And if what you suggest were even a bit true, then there would have been no need for combatives and everyone, including Fairbairn would just have studied BJJ and muay thai.

I give plenty of reasons of why BJJ and muay thai won't cut it here:

http://www.defend.net/deluxeforums/showthread.php?t=18800&page=4

The funniest thing about this is I typed this post when I typed the above post asking you to consider things. I saved this in case that post was wasted on you, and you required a long, elaborate post explaining every point and detail.

And here we are.

[DickHardman]

Its not a generalization. I mean no rudeness by this, but you are a victim of the school of thought that teaches that you can train and fight in the ring for years one way, and then all of a sudden change in less than 1 second to become educated in urban combatives.

another generalization.

IEverything has its value. That has never been a point in contention. The issue is that some systems and skills are better suited for better situations. As far as combatives go, they were originally traditional martial arts that were stripped down and rebuilt to address the reality of violence as it occurs in today's urban environments. This task didn't happen overnight or even over a few years. They have been in development for decades and have never stopped evolving to meet the needs of a man who will face violence that involves weapons and multiple attackers. Over the years, systems have been refined to remain cutting edge. This would not be possible if the men doing it didn't understand one simple thing: The techniques in a systems are based on the concepts and methodologies that address street violence, not the other way around. That's a statement that most people on this forum haven't fully digested yet.

thats great, that still doesnt mean that people cant put together decent self defense skills from other disciplines/arts, nor does it have anything to do with what we are talking about.

I'm sure a football player somewhere in the world has used a shoulder rush tackle to foil a mugging attempt. I'm sure a ballet dancer somewhere has thrown a high kick to defend themselves again a weapon. As I said, anything is possible, but not everything is safe and/or wise to attempt. You could argue that anything could work even though its meant and trained to be used within the confines of its own rules. I know masters of tae kwon do, capoeira, aikido, goju, shotokan and other traditional martial arts that are amazing fighters and could compete at the top levels of NHB. What do they all have in common though? They all have to be in professional level shape in order to be able to be effective with what they've learned. That's the difference. If they fall out of shape for whatever reason, all the years of training and dedication go out of the window. They still have better skills that non-trained fighters, but they aren't even 60% of what they were when they were in pro-level shape. Combatives doesn't require a man to live unrealistically. It addresses the fact that not every man who has a need to defend himself will be in the shape to throw a triple spinning kick found in tae kwon do. He won't be able to do handstands out on the pavement a spin into wheel kicks like you see in capoeira. As you pointed out, most won't be out there picking men up off the ground to powerbomb them. Those are sportive methods that don't teach you to maximize your tools. They teach you to display toughness and exert a lot of energy while attempting to pace yourself. You would have to spend 10-20 years achieving a level of athleticism in capoeira, tae kwon do or boxing just to defend yourself in weapon or multiple attack situations. In top level combatives, you're learning how to defend against blades, firearms and several attackers on your first day. You'd have a higher degree of understanding to survive street violence within 6 months of combatives as opposed to 5 years of training in MMA or other sportive arts.

i agree that combatives training is better for sd, however that still doesnt mean that sportive arts cant be used to create decent self defense skills and mentality.

But it would also program you to go into real and dangerous situations with the same approach as you would in the ring or mat, which wouldn't be far from reckless abandon. And that isn't an insult, only an accurate statement meant to reflect how unprepared sport arts leave their students for reality level violence.

still generalzing here. i stated to you repeatedly that some martial artists will be able to realize what will be practical and what wont and will be able to take whats useful and supplement that with things from other arts.

My stance has always been that combatives exist for a reason. I find it interesting that many MMA advocates direct their arguments toward the military, when it was in the military that combatives were born. However as time went on, vicious hand to hand tactics were deemed too "brutal and unnecessary". The reality of warfare became firearms and munitions, and the savage fighting styles of WWII quickly began to fade out of all but the most dedicated circles.

this doesnt have anything to do with the fact that some people will be able to put together good self defense skills by using sport arts. i dont why you feel the need to go off topic....

People found a fascination with Kano's watered down randori-based judo and modern yet watered down karate. Soon, the birth of McDojo's came about, and the whoring of arts became a free for all. After a while, it became a joke to tell someone you were a black belt.

thats great n all, but this too has nothing to do with what we were talking about.

You may believe what you want to, but reality isn't what you say it is. It is what it is. And if what you suggest were even a bit true, then there would have been no need for combatives and everyone, including Fairbairn would just have studied BJJ and muay thai.

I give plenty of reasons of why BJJ and muay thai won't cut it here:

http://www.defend.net/deluxeforums/showthread.php?t=18800&page=4

The funniest thing about this is I typed this post when I typed the above post asking you to consider things. I saved this in case that post was wasted on you, and you required a long, elaborate post explaining every point and detail.

And here we are.

you are starting to talk about things i never brought up. i didnt say mt and bjj were the end all be all, so i dont know why you would imply i beleive this by saying that if that was the case then fairbairn would jsut study bjj and mt.

[ACP]

WOW! What a long winded subject.

[jubaji]

LOL!

I like how some folks who have never actually done what they 'theoretically' pretend to do in 'training' (even going so far as to shout at each other, oh my!) try to take an attitude of superiority based on gritty realism over folks who have done what they purport to do thousands upon thousands of times against people actively trying to thwart them.

Its funny that when asked if they have ever so much as scratched another human being in anger with a knife they sheepishly avoid the question or defensively lash out with the 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' song.

Weapons training a good idea? Yeah

Carrying a weapon ALL the time a good idea? Hmmm, not all the time.

Knowing how to use a weapon a good idea? Oh, yeah.

Training with weapons a good excuse for being a weak, inferior physical specimen without one? Absolutely not.

Training with weapons and avoiding all other training a cause for feeling superior? Laughable.