It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionAre martial arts actually useless...?(47 posts)(47 posts)
(47 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 02, 2015
low rated
It is a fact that most of them teach the obligatory self, guilt and consciousness imposed rule, to never harm others, especially weaker people than you. As if that had not been enough, should we find ourselves in conflict and the loosing side proves we had training in it and them didn't, we can even face prison or worse... One good deal of those arts is spent "brainwashing" the disciples to restrain themselves, their anger and extend compassion towards others, almost enforced. And if someone is actually a good person, by adding all this on his shoulder, he is almost certainly to never even utilize whatever he/she learned.

But there is worse! There is weapon training in some of those arts (nun'chuku, chain weapons some of the most popular ones utilized in more than 1 art) and someone can get law's shaft HARD by even CARRYING one of those, let alone utilizing it in a fight, even when he proves to be attacked first and being in defense exclusively! And even on the defensive, while using one of those, there is always the risk of the removal of weapon license, in case of being caught red-handed!

Don't get me wrong, i love tradition and antiques, them being an item, a teaching, or an ideal. Yet, they are actually entirely useless? If you cannot utilize those techniques into practical protection of your person, or retaliation against people that harmed you a lot, then, what would be their use, i wonder...? Why is the law so much in favor of parasitic scumbags, instead of pious people who devote themselves into the study of tradition and the practice of self-perfection?
Post edited May 02, 2015 by KiNgBrAdLeY7
Posted May 02, 2015
high rated
Well they'r...oh, it's another bradley post. I thought it was going to be a serious discussion for a moment.
Posted May 02, 2015
As someone who took lessons, been in real fights, and seen real fights; a lot of martial arts are useless because they are "cookie cutter" and some are mostly for sporting events. The tae kwon do and karate lessons I took involved having to simulate an attack with the same style punch and doing impractical stances. Kicks were too high for effective combat and a lot of it was stretch exercises and demonstrations. Also, by "cookie cutter," I mean they were one size fits all and opponents had to attack a certain way or grab a certain way in order for the "technique" to work. Sparing matches were just sporting events since opponents were often segregated by body size (completely different from a real fight) and whenever I was paired up with a smaller opponent, I was told to go easy.

The traditional methods of swordsmanship and such are good for exercise and combat discipline but that's where their usefulness ends.

Practical martial arts would be gunmanship (as in learning to hip-fire and use with weapon stuck into the gut of an opponent), knifemanship, and mixed martial arts. Learning improvised forms of combat would be great especially the use of the environment around you, objects lying around, and circumstantial tricks like tripping an opponent.

I will say I did learn some interesting grappling techniques when I was a young adult taking karate lessons at college. Could be useful someday.
Posted May 02, 2015
low rated
avatar
MaximumBunny: Well they'r...oh, it's another bradley post. I thought it was going to be a serious discussion for a moment.
Well, after the first page, serious posts are going to start appearing. Pattern became predictable.
avatar
infinite9: As someone who took lessons, been in real fights, and seen real fights; a lot of martial arts are useless because they are "cookie cutter" and some are mostly for sporting events. The tae kwon do and karate lessons I took involved having to simulate an attack with the same style punch and doing impractical stances. Kicks were too high for effective combat and a lot of it was stretch exercises and demonstrations. Also, by "cookie cutter," I mean they were one size fits all and opponents had to attack a certain way or grab a certain way in order for the "technique" to work. Sparing matches were just sporting events since opponents were often segregated by body size (completely different from a real fight) and whenever I was paired up with a smaller opponent, I was told to go easy.

The traditional methods of swordsmanship and such are good for exercise and combat discipline but that's where their usefulness ends.

Practical martial arts would be gunmanship (as in learning to hip-fire and use with weapon stuck into the gut of an opponent), knifemanship, and mixed martial arts. Learning improvised forms of combat would be great especially the use of the environment around you, objects lying around, and circumstantial tricks like tripping an opponent.

I will say I did learn some interesting grappling techniques when I was a young adult taking karate lessons at college. Could be useful someday.
Thanks for the contribution, friend! I am glad that serious posts appeared much sooner than i initially anticipated. Karate, especially certain styles like Kyokushin, is said to be very effective. Still, though, won't you meet trouble, if you hit someone with martial arts technique?

(i remember in tae kwon do the hilarious exhibitions, breaking pieces of wood with yop chaki, and they were pre-cracked in the middle before the show, had been a green belt a long time ago and stopped, mainly for reasons like those you mentioned).

Knifemanship? It's good in my book (tanto jutsu), but it's really dangerous carrying a pair of those, law is angry. While your average street thug has some (and most probably zero technique to augment it).

Have you ever hit anyone, as a last resort of course, and NOT found any trouble afterwards? That is what i want to examine, though and what i originally meant... We spend a lot of time and effort, learn some things and those, instead of protecting us, carry the risk to bring us trouble!
Post edited May 02, 2015 by KiNgBrAdLeY7
Posted May 02, 2015
high rated
No, but this thread is. :D
Posted May 02, 2015
avatar
KiNgBrAdLeY7: One good deal of those arts is spent "brainwashing" the disciples to restrain themselves, their anger and extend compassion towards others, almost enforced.
Are you Emperor Palpatine?
Posted May 02, 2015
Not useless, but......

Unless you do it for health and self-enrichment reason, the investment vs results is too much
Posted May 02, 2015
Yes they are
Attachments:
stick_figure2.gif (10 Kb)
Posted May 02, 2015
Well, to cover one of your points, if someone is going to learn combat techniques, then learning self-restraint is a rather important step, I'd say.
Posted May 02, 2015
avatar
Cavenagh: Yes they are
That's some high end action there! Bruce Lee eat your heart out!
Posted May 02, 2015
avatar
KiNgBrAdLeY7: ...One good deal of those arts is spent "brainwashing" the disciples to restrain themselves, their anger and extend compassion towards others, almost enforced.
Seriously? Have you even had any extensive experience in learning or training in martial arts? No one's holding a gun to your head in a martial arts class saying "be a good person or else". And there's no subliminal messaging that's programming a code of ethics or behaviors into you. Unless you believe that any and all set of laws or principles concerning proper conduct and appropriate behavior is "brainwashing".
avatar
KiNgBrAdLeY7: Why is the law so much in favor of parasitic scumbags, instead of pious people who devote themselves into the study of tradition and the practice of self-perfection?
And what evidence do you have for this? Do you have case studies or can you cite specific examples of Greek Law, or US Law, etc.? Here's what I found from Canadian Law:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/self-defence-what-s-acceptable-under-canadian-law-1.1229180
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/rsddp-rlddp/index.html

Bill C-26 (S.C. 2012 c. 9)
Reforms to Self-Defence and Defence of Property: Technical Guide for Practitioners

Department of Justice, Canada
March 2013

SELF-DEFENCE

34 (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if

(a) they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used against them or another person or that a threat of force is being made against them or another person;
(b) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of defending or protecting themselves or the other person from that use or threat of force; and
(c) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances
So basically, if you use your martial arts techniques in a manner that is proportional to the level of threat involved, you wouldn't be found criminally negligible. For example, if someone was clearly and unambiguously going to physically harm a member of your family, doing something like sending them to the ground with a leg sweep or a throw, or disabling them with a measured strike to the solar plexus or their collarbone would be totally allowable (giving you ample opportunity to escape or get help). Killing them by striking their larynx with a hard punch and snapping their neck, wouldn't be.

In short, you should be reasonable and rational in your application of force when attacked or defending others from attack. Which is what any sane and decent martial arts/self-defense course would do.
Post edited May 02, 2015 by rampancy
Posted May 02, 2015
It's not only about the challenge of sports or self-defense, it's about harmony and self-discipline. Physical and mental exercise is another reason. I've always been interested in it but sadly I'm rather lazy. I took a beginner's course in my local university and I really enjoyed it. I would prefer having a personal trainer rather than participating with a group but I imagine that's expensive.
Post edited May 02, 2015 by Nirth
Posted May 02, 2015
avatar
Nirth: It's not only about the challenge of sports or self-defense, it's about harmony and self-discipline. Physical and mental exercise is another reason. I've always been interested in it but sadly I'm rather lazy. I took a beginner's course in my local university and I really enjoyed it. I would prefer having a personal trainer rather than participating with a group but I imagine that's expensive.
QFT. And the notion of "harmony and self-discipline" as "brainwashing" is ridiculous.
Posted May 02, 2015
avatar
KiNgBrAdLeY7: Knifemanship? It's good in my book (tanto jutsu), but it's really dangerous carrying a pair of those, law is angry. While your average street thug has some (and most probably zero technique to augment it).

Have you ever hit anyone, as a last resort of course, and NOT found any trouble afterwards? That is what i want to examine, though and what i originally meant... We spend a lot of time and effort, learn some things and those, instead of protecting us, carry the risk to bring us trouble!
You don't need a knife to use knife fighting techniques.

And if you get in trouble with the law, it means you've gone too far. Unless you live in the US, then it means you're black.
Posted May 02, 2015
A gun will beat the best of them.....

Next Topic as this is solved.....
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionAre martial arts actually useless...?(47 posts)(47 posts)
(47 posts)