Weapons - skills/objects

Quillo

It never ceases to amaze me how the mere mention of carrying a “weapon” can generate such abuse on a martial arts/self-defence forum.

It is somehow viewed (by some people) as an act of the mentally unstable or socially maladjusted. After all, what normal person would deliberate carry something that could be used it to harm another human being…….

Well – my non-MA friends often ask me the same thing: why do I spend a couple of hundreds hours a year training in techniques of military origin (that is, a "martial" art) designed to harm others.

The “why” is simple – I enjoy what I do, gain a positive health benefit from the exercise and I believe that these activities significantly improve my ability to defend myself and my family if forced to do so.

And here’s why I’m amazed at some of the reaction and comments on this forum. What, ultimately, in a moral/ethical sense is the difference between “carrying” knowledge and skills that could harm others and carrying an object that could harm others ?

Surely the important issue is not what you are carrying but rather what it is you do with what you are carrying ?

Millionaire

If I lived in a dangerous place (country with problems, city, dangerous area of a city, or not to pass through a place like this)... I might consider carrying a legal weapon.

It the USA, that might mean MACE/Pepper Spray for example.

As before Avoidence is the number 1 issue of course!

For example here in Thailand, sometimes i carry a weapon! Not for attacks from people...but from attacks from packs of stray dogs that roam around and can attack (I have a few very close calls already), some may have rabies. So If I am going walking I take a stick, and I bash the bastards if they come near me! thats better than going through horrific rabies treatments!

john kavanagh

personally i've never gotten involved in those threads. if someone wants/needs to carry something to feel safe then whatever, i dont care!

but if i may attempt to answer your questions posed.

Quillo wrote:

What, ultimately, in a moral/ethical sense is the difference between “carrying” knowledge and skills that could harm others and carrying an object that could harm others?

there is a lot of difference. when i'm running out the door on my way to the shops/town etc i dont stop to think to myself "hmmm have i packed my right cross, 200m sprint, knee..." whereas i have known people in the past who've told me they do stop to think "have i packed my clip-it knife, mace spray, baton....". so there is a difference.

but like i said at the start i would never presume to know what people should and shouldn't be doing - i just offer my advice which they are free to ignore

Quillo

there is a lot of difference. when i'm running out the door on my way to the shops/town etc i dont stop to think to myself "hmmm have i packed my right cross, 200m sprint, knee..." whereas i have known people in the past who've told me they do stop to think "have i packed my clip-it knife, mace spray, baton....". so there is a difference.

I know that there are practical/procedural differences John, and there are obvious legal issues to be considered too. The question though is, are there any moral/ethical differences to justify the outrage that some people feel when someone mentions carrying objects to defend themselves ?

cushtac

I don't think there's a moral or ethical difference between carrying or not carrying - in both cases you're either doing so for defensive or offensive purposes. There is a cultural difference between the two, as the practice of arming onself when going out has long died out in this part of the world.

columok

Here goes...

The way I figure it the carrying and willingness to use a concealed weapon suggests to me that the carrier is either under danger of attack or percieves a danger. If you really feel that your situation in life is so dangerous as to force you to be armed then what are you doing to change your situation? That would be important step one. Now the situations I perceive that it might be necessary to carry some kind of baton or stick would include.

Are you one of following?: (Not joking)
1) Homeless
2) Prostitute
3) Drug Dealer
4) Some types of security work
5) Police
6) Irish equivalent of paramedic (cause we don't have any)

I'm sure there are others but few enough.

Ordinary civilians should not be carrying weapons. Particularily when most of our lives are safe as houses for the most part.

Carrying a weapon escalates situations. To paraphrase Roper "If you carry a weapon you'll find a reason to use it". I consider it anti-social for the majority of people to carry weapons not to mention illegal. I would also consider it relatively unhealthy to find excuses pre-emptively to be carrying your sai around in your coat pocket on a saturday
night in Supermacs.

I would refer you back to JKs post about the likelihood of someone with a weapon who hasn't killed you yet and has shown you the weapon wanting to do you harm rather than just wanting to run away with your money.

Now are you proposing vigilante justice?

uberpixie

Quillo wrote:

I know that there are practical/procedural differences John, and there are obvious legal issues to be considered too. The question though is, are there any moral/ethical differences to justify the outrage that some people feel when someone mentions carrying objects to defend themselves ?

(1) Image of people that carry weapons on a daily basis being paranoid nutcases/ scumbags.

(2) Using a weapon is not girrr manly,cowardly, it is a trait of a scum bag.

(3) People don't like to think that they have to carry a weapon to defend themselves: i.e. my TMA/MMA/RBSD empty hand techniques are enough to defend myself, I don't need weapons.

(4) Avoidance is the key to self defense, If someone carries a weapon they are more likely to use it and do something stupid.

judomick

I think carrying a weapon is showing a certain type of mindset, morals or ethics i dont think play a part in it, i do IMO think there is an underlying fear and paranoia, whether its justified or not

Quillo

Carrying a weapon escalates situations. To paraphrase Roper "If you carry a weapon you'll find a reason to use it". I consider it anti-social for the majority of people to carry weapons not to mention illegal. I would also consider it relatively unhealthy to find excuses pre-emptively to be carrying your sai around in your coat pocket on a saturday
night in Supermacs.

But surely this applies as much to skills as it does to objects ?
If you're a hardened Muay Thai fighter (for example) are you not more likely to use your skills to defend yourself simply because you have those skills at your disposal ?

And, once again, how is it any more or less anti-social going around carrying the training that teaches you how to injure or kill with your hands compared to carrying an object capable of inflicting similar damage ?

Millionaire

judomick wrote:

i do IMO think there is an underlying fear and paranoia, whether its justified or not

Yes my fear and paranoia of getting bitten by a dog with rabies! LOL!!!


What about have a weapon under the bed at home (for example)?

Is that different than one who carries a weapon on the person outside?

To me it is different... I always had a big police batton under the bed. Never had to use it, thank God. But it was always there. Living in Rathmines, where alot of break in happen.

My father had the same under the bed for years. He did have to use it a few times... a couple of break in s when he was in the house, and 2 scum trying to steal the car one night. To sum up, he gave the break in criminals a lash or two on the arms with it and they took off, and the car thugs...he verbally challenged them, one when for him, and he gave them a good few whacks, which cause both crims to run.

Now to me I have no moral problem with that at all. They came into the house to cause harm or steal the car. The old man was just right to do it, and he's not a thug...he also has roasary beads under the bed... maybe he could choke them out next time with the roasary beads! LOL!!!

cushtac

Quillo wrote:

And, once again, how is it any more or less anti-social going around carrying the training that teaches you how to injure or kill with your hands compared to carrying an object capable of inflicting similar damage ?

It would be considered more anti-social to carry a weapon as they have a greater capacity to inflict damage. Getting stabbed, hit by a blunt object or shot is, by and large, going to be more painful & debilitating than an unarmed attack.

judomick

Millionaire wrote:

Yes my fear and paranoia of getting bitten by a dog with rabies!

Exactly, you know when you go walking theres a high probability theres goin to be dogs so you take a stick, a fairly innoccuous object, but if someone goes out to the city or for groceries, small probability but you take a knife or other item, this is, in my opinion overly paranoid unless you live in beirut or baghdad

Lets say someone tries to mug you with no weapons you take your knife out, is that a valid cause? theres so many variables we could sit here all day and say what if?

The facts are avoidance is best, its illegal to carry weapons for a reason so dont, if everyone start carrying weapons for everytime someone is attacked the murder rate in this country would sky rocket!

Tim_Murphy

But surely this applies as much to skills as it does to objects ?
If you're a hardened Muay Thai fighter (for example) are you not more likely to use your skills to defend yourself simply because you have those skills at your disposal ?

Don't know any MT fighters, but I know plenty of MMA ones. If ever you wanted to find a group of lads who were not likely to get into fights then go to Redz after a Ring of Truth!

BTW, what people do is there own business, but it seems very weird to be that somebody in Ireland would feel the need the carry weapons around with them.

cushtac

Millionaire wrote:

What about have a weapon under the bed at home (for example)?

Is that different than one who carries a weapon on the person outside?

The first difference is that your home is not a public place, so you should not posing a threat to others. The second is that while in public you might have the chance of escape or retreat and so avoid a fight. You would have less chance of retreating in your home and so would have more justification in using force, especially if protecting your family.

Scramble

My opinion: The law effectively prohibits the carrying of a weapon in a public place, and you run the risk of being prosecuted if you go against that.

I also wouldn't take lightly an attitude where someone decides they are just going to opt-out of abiding by the Firearms and Offensive Weapons act and do their own thing. If I felt I didn't need insurance when I drove my car, would that be OK? I think there is a moral dimension to any discussion of the law, in that sense. When we chip away or ignore bits of it we undermine the whole of it.

If someone thinks this state of affairs isn't right, then they have the option of trying to bring about a change in our legislation by bringing a legal challenge, or they could move to a jursidiction more to their taste, if they feel that strongly about it.

Boru.

Intresting quesiton but I'd like to focus on the actual assumption of the weapon here. For instance most people are coming out with knives, sticks etc. I always carry a weapon on me. My Parker. My slimline parker pen that is. It's kept in the right hand front pocket of my pants. I don't need a knife, or a stick or anything like that. I can just carry a pen about. I can write things or it can help even the odds against a knife attack or a syringe mugging (both of which I have had the misfortune to be in...long before I studied RBPP).

It's also one of the big things I teach in RBPP - carry a pen everywhere. It's just common sense...you never know when you could bump in to Victoria Silvstedt and need to give her your number.

Does carrying a pen make me paranoid? No more so than having the no. of the emergancy services on speed dial. Lord knows I don't want to be involved in a serious accident or medical emergency but you never know and it's best to prepared. Same thing with first aid. Everyone should know it, and not becasue everyone should be paraniod about medical emergencies, it's just a good idea.

As regards vigilanties - ONLY if wearing a Batman Costume.

Roper

Well I think I'll contribute since I've been paraphrased.:)

My comment on the last thread of this sort was along the lines of what Colum said, if you're carrying a weapon you'll probably use it at some stage. Not every time you carry it of course.

If you carry a baton, and you get into a fist fight, you'll probably pull the baton. Who wouldn't if you had it? Run the risk of getting beaten, or pull the baton immediately and gain the advantage? Its an easy choice. But now you're the guy who has introduced a weapon.

Look, everybody knows there are situations, extreme situations in which you can morally justify using a weapon, thats not up for debate. What is up for debate is how healthy it is for a guy to walk out the door with an extendable baton in his pocket. I know a guy who lives in a very nice area, works in engineering, good salary, good friends, and every time he goes out for drinks he carrys just that.

I find that odd and paranoid. The danger on our streets is exaggerated by red-tops on slow news days. Right now you don't ear anything because they've got plenty of terrorism to write about but on the next lull in the news it'll either be Wayne Rooney's underwear or the dreaded STREET.

Budo.Judo.Kev

The parker pen is mightier than the syringe.

Quillo

The "tactical" pen
http://sayoc.com/product_info.php?products_id=169

Musashi

I have a surefire, or maglite, flashlight on me most days. It's well handy to find my keys, light a dark pathway or check who's hanging around my car after I come out of the cinema. Is it a weapon? Pretty much anything can be a weapon, it's the person who makes it one. I have been stopped and searched by the Gardai, the flashlight was examined and returned to me. Same thing with my pen, mobile phone etc. These are tools, and could be weapons, it depends.

Actually on my keys was a "Leatherman Squirt" which has a blade among other tools, and it is just that,another tool. Would people balk at the sight of a co-worker using a Swiss Army Knife to open a package or eat an apple? What makes a weapon out of a tool? There are laws in place to restrict someone bringing a Katana to Mickey D's, or a roofing hammer to a nightclub door. Garda response times to an incident may not be as fast as we would like though So each of us decides how to ensure our safety, from avoiding rough areas to becoming a Howard Hughs type recluse.

Roper

Musashi wrote:

Would people balk at the sight of a co-worker using a Swiss Army Knife to open a package or eat an apple? What makes a weapon out of a tool? There are laws in place to restrict someone bringing a Katana to Mickey D's, or a roofing hammer to a nightclub door. Garda response times to an incident may not be as fast as we would like though So each of us decides how to ensure our safety, from avoiding rough areas to becoming a Howard Hughs type recluse.

Musashi,
I agree, each of us does decide how to best ensure our safety. But when you live in a society you agree to abide by its laws. In addition, like or no, you are a contributor to the norms of that society. If enough people went out in their underwear tomorrow, we would accept that eventually. Equally, if enough people carried knives, we would begin to accept that, and with it we would have to accept its consequences.

FiannaGym.com

Thanks to wind sprints, I can out run this ethical debate.

As an athlete I'm not involved in this debate but I do find it comical that dudes I can man handle, and generally play with in an "alive envornment" believe their "training" some how puts them in the same category as "lethal" weapons.

At least have the ethics to register your hands down the police station.

Peace

Niall Keane

Can see truth and prejudice on both sides of this argument. I personally train in Tai Chi Chuan and fight in San Da completions and I don’t carry weapons on “the street”, i.e. I train in a traditional martial art that emphasizes the understanding and mastery of weapon fighting, but I realize that competition format empty-hand, full-contact fighting against opponents who wish to knock you out is essential in order to truly understand and be reasonably proficient in combat.
I have trained in saber, sword and spear and find them invaluable in the education of range, timing, leverage, softness and the issuing of power, each weapon teaching different aspects and skills regarding weapon and body usage, which is obvious, but also it helps us understand the value of intent, i.e. the ability to be resolute but also capable of change, the classics teach: the technique is broken, but the intent unbroken. When it is opportune to abandon a weapon, for e.g. when an opponent passes the range of the spear the spear becomes a liability to the user, then what most consider kickboxing with throws, becomes more effective, the ability to abandon a weapon but still fight on is essential. In sanshou / San Da, we can clinch / grapple, but there are 3 X 3 Minutes in a fight, if you wrestle and always “fight” the opponent you may gain the 2 points for the throw but you’ll probably be exhausted and now weakened and vulnerable to the next attack, if we are willing to give up the technique and box our way out when things don’t go as planned, we conserve energy. Added to this, for many opponents in my experience, they break down and compartmentalize kicking, punching and throwing, by changing the game you surprise them and break their intent, i.e. if they are a better wrestler and when you go to throw them you can’t, by giving up the wrestling techniques and instead hurting them with strikes, they (the better wrestler) no longer want to come close to you, suddenly you have negated their strengths without confronting them head on.
Beyond the intent training, weapons must be learned in order to understand their potential use, how a single / double bladed knife / sword or a spear - long-ranged weapon can be used, and also where it is weak.
We train hand to hand to learn exactly this, the weaknesses and strengths of the body. It is as ridiculous to assume that someone who boxes (here I use the term loosely – I refer to kick punch & throw) once a year or so, or even worse in a non-resistant manner can defend themselves, as it is to assume someone who has never practiced weapons, or even worse still has only practiced empty handed defenses, can be aware of the implications of weapon use. Sun Tzu tells us know your enemy, and know your self 100 battles 100 victories, and as Sun Lu Tang on his death bed stated the secret to martial arts is practice.
As for laws, in my teens blades less than 6 inches were allowed to be carried in Ireland, after they were banned, law abiding citizens stopped carrying. But the criminals, the muggers, no longer did they carry stilettos, butterflies and flicks, that could lead to them being traced, and anyway cost too mush, now it was down to a supermarket, to buy a DISPOSABLE, “LASER” EDGED, 12 INCH CLASS A WEAPON, something designed to GLIDE through meat. Who loses????
Still - being a law abiding citizen, I won’t carry a weapon, but make no mistake, if I’m attacked with lethal force, I won’t be subduing anyone, I’ll be striking to maim and kill, and throwing not onto the pavement but if the opportunity arises into an oncoming vehicle. My home is filled with weapons, not because I’m into some weapon fetish, but because I love my art, if someone intrudes, if I have the range and change I’ll warn them, if they don’t heed the warning, or they have surprised me, I’ll use what ever is to hand, after all, if they came unarmed they’ve probably picked something up. Perhaps this will have consequences, but better to spend a decade or two in Mountjoy than being forever underground! I have in my time received injuries from weapons, one that opened my eyes was a slice to my left index finger, I ended up two days later under a plastic surgeons knife with him reattaching some nerves, and with 48 stitches, that was just a finger! What did I learn, well as I have said before on this forum, intent is everything, skill certainly is necessary, we can guarantee nothing, but make no mistake he who hesitates is lost!!!

Let me add, I’m not trying to get at anyone here, I don’t believe in styles, fighters make fights, and every fighter, no matter what his background has a different style, I’m just adding what have become my truths to the debate.

Millionaire

FiannaGym.com wrote:

As an athlete I'm not involved in this debate .

Peace

You would be involved if some criminal hit you a crack of an iron bar on the head some night, so get your wallet!

Experiencing these incidents can make you took at it with a very different angle.

FiannaGym.com

Okay Millionare let me rephrase,

I'm an athlete so the ethical debate is one that doesn't concern me. Likewise, if I am incapacitated, as muhc as I might like it to, it wont concern me.

The thrust of my argument is this:

If you can use your "lethal weapons" you can use your "wind sprints". One is rife with problems, the other is great for cardio.

Peace