PDA

View Full Version : So called "Killing Techniques".... HAH!



MaFuYee
05-15-2002, 10:39 AM
does your school teach you "killing techniques"?
if so, how realistic are they?

i feel that most schools that teach "killing techniques", often teach ridiculous things that they claim will kill; and will often fool the young and naieve. (and, many times they will fool the old and stupid as well.)

e.g. i know people who are convinced that they can kill someone by punching them in the solarplexus. (after the obligatory blocking of the kick to the groin.) ... and while i guess, it is possible, (if done by, and to, the right person) i find the likelihood of this actually happening to be quite low.

then i know of a certain kempo school that teaches "killing techniques", such as: inserting two fingers through the person's right eye, hooking them around behind the bridge of the nose, and ripping his nose off from the inside out. - HAHAHA!!!

i actually had a friend who is a blackbelt at one of these schools tell me this with a straight face! - of course i had to laugh in his face, and mock him mercilessly for years, about that one.

then you've got the schools that teach the "deadly dim mak" strikes... *cough*bllsht*cough*
- while i do find merit to the potential to heal/harm using merridian points; a lot of the stuff i see out there is basically just idiots who picked up an accupuncture book and let their imaginations run wild. (* i say "many", not all.)

e.g. look at the cover of george dillman's books - he's actually using his big toe to press on a point on the top of someone's foot, no bigger than 3cm in diameter, while grabbing two on his wrist, and striking one on his forearm... and, this is supposed to send a shock to his heart, and kill him.... all for just grabbing his gi. - and what about that pier tsu idiot, who sells that "dim mak encyclopedia", for just 3 easy payments of $49.99? - and his tai chi dim mak buddy? - these people.... tsk tsk tsk...

even schools that teach something as simple as punching someone in the throat, and calling that a killing technique, i find to be a little off, because, lets face it, no one is just going to let you punch him in the throat, and even if you do manage to, without the technique required, it may just end up p1ssing him off.

*********

what are some of the "killing techniques" taught at your school?

- in mine, "killing techniques", are ones that are likely to do serious harm. - not necessarily kill on the spot, with one touch. - many involve breaking joints, and throwing to the ground, so that they land on their head/neck. - no guarantee it will kill, but it will certainly hurt, and possibly kill. - also, many involve quick twists/cranks of the neck; after some sort of hit/set up. - again, no guarantee of death, but certainly a high potential for injury.

Water Dragon
05-15-2002, 10:51 AM
Shoulder throw so they land on thier head?

shaolinboxer
05-15-2002, 10:54 AM
More in the context of "becareful or you could get killed/seriously hurt" than "learn this technique which will enable you to kill, seriously hurt someone".

chingei
05-15-2002, 11:01 AM
I agree that most of that 'deadly' stuff is bull****. It makes for a convenient excuse for the silk pj crowd to explain why they never have and never will engage in physical confrontation of any kind.

"I can't fight that 6'5'' 250 lbs. trained fighter because I'd kill the poor fellow" (my silk uniform has suddenly become moist)

Liokault
05-15-2002, 11:31 AM
then i know of a certain kempo school that teaches "killing techniques", such as: inserting two fingers through the person's right eye, hooking them around behind the bridge of the nose, and ripping his nose off from the inside out. - HAHAHA!!!

Looks to me like this would kill?....I do not see the problem you have.

I do have a problem with people being taught "killing" techniques even though they will almost never work in reallity. What are they trying to sell to their students?

Dark Knight
05-15-2002, 11:42 AM
I have been to seminars with a couple of Dillmans students. The PP KO's do work. But in a live fight its hard to hit those points exactly. (Dont know if they kill, but can verify the KO's)

In general most of the "kill" techniques that are taught are very questionable. If it was that easy Mike tyson should have killed a couple people with the power he generates.

The bigget group I have seen cliaming their technques kill are the ninja's. I have been told by a couplw that they dont spar because their stuff is too deadly. I convinced them to try sparring and Im still alive.

People want to believe in the mystisim of the martial arts. Kickboxing then NHB has proven that its not that easy to kill someone with a strike.

Nowas far as a technique that will kill.....choke them.

(I would think if you can hit hard enough or beat somone long enough they will die.)

Budokan
05-15-2002, 11:46 AM
Here's a killing technique that seldom fails:

9mm slug to the medulla oblongata. Result: pink mist explodes violently from cranium. Secondary result: death or deep coma. Both are acceptable outcomes.

Badger
05-15-2002, 12:25 PM
Nude picture of Rosie O'Donnell. Works everytime.





Badger

Royal Dragon
05-15-2002, 01:18 PM
I'd rather make sure it doesn't fail so i'd use a 16 inch gun.
The shell weighs about 2,200 lbs and leaves a 50 foot wide crater, so i wouldn't have worry about looking for any pink stuff. Just have to get the victim within 20 miles of a naval ship.

Reply]
Good one, and they can't charge you with murder for a body they can't find either!! ('cause you disintigrated it):D

Taomonkey
05-15-2002, 01:51 PM
If you teach a technique designed to kill, and tell your students that this technique will kill, then what will you say on the witness stand when the judge asks you why did you teach such a technique with no other purpose than to kill. Are you guilty as well. Is your sstudent guilty of murder?
As for my students, I would have to say that yes they were guilty of murder. (though it may be justified and reasonable) Because I told them what the outcome would be if they used the technique. YOu dont pull out a gun and then try to say you didnt know a bullet would come out, or that the bullet would kill.

I look to the great Sholin master Po who told young Quai Chani Kang,
Avoid rather than check
Check rather than hurt
Hurt rather than Maim
Maim rather than Kill
For all life is precious
and none can be replaced

TenTigers
05-15-2002, 02:49 PM
yeah, but that lil ***got quai chang grew up to be David Carradine-'nuff said

MonkeySlap Too
05-15-2002, 03:00 PM
Yeah I'd have to say the 'kill' techniques fall into the 'at least it'll permanantly f'ckk'em up category.

In my club we do have techniques you don't play in sparring because of the damage you'd do to your partner. I think most martial sports at one time or another had these vestigal limbs from thier 'martial art' days - heel hooks in wrestling would be a good example.

Then there is knifecraft, which is all pretty much dangerous.

I agree, most schools teach so called 'kill' techniques with great seriousness even though the teacher understands no anatomy and physiology, never tried the technique in combat and never saw it used.

Heck, I've got plenty of stuff I never used or saw used, but I know the set-up works, and I know enough anatomy and physiology and kinesiology to give me a reasonable sense of what'll work. The flaw in many schools is the lack of educated students. You need to be credulous to be a good student, you need to have faith in the art and the teachers transmission of it. But when you get to know it, you need to have some basis for understanding what is real, and what might be a misunderstanding on your teachers part.

Sure, I learned Dim Mak stuff - but I'd never bet my life on it in combat. The confidence level from practice is not as high as say, a neck cracking throw. I prefer to rely that which I know I can count on to keep my blood circulating in my body and not on the sidewalk.

JerryLove
05-15-2002, 03:24 PM
what are some of the "killing techniques" taught at your school?

- in mine, "killing techniques", are ones that are likely to do serious harm. - not necessarily kill on the spot, with one touch. - many involve breaking joints, and throwing to the ground, so that they land on their head/neck. - no guarantee it will kill, but it will certainly hurt, and possibly kill. - also, many involve quick twists/cranks of the neck; after some sort of hit/set up. - again, no guarantee of death, but certainly a high potential for injury. Yep, that sounds about right. My weaponliess techniques most likely to cause death are probibly the "plant head on pavement" and "drop knee on neck" variety.



If you teach a technique designed to kill, and tell your students that this technique will kill, then what will you say on the witness stand when the judge asks you why did you teach such a technique with no other purpose than to kill. "So that they can use it to kill some one Judge". What an obvious question.

We teach work with fireams and blades; do you think those aren't "killing techniques"?


Is your sstudent guilty of murder? As for my students, I would have to say that yes they were guilty of murder. (though it may be justified and reasonable) If it's justified it's not murder. You are confusing words. The killing of one human by another human is "homicide"; to be "murder" it *must* be unlawful.


I look to the great Sholin master Po who told young Quai Chani Kang,
Avoid rather than check Dangerous. The guy gets mad and you just dodge. He gets so frustrated he storms off... to get his gun. Then he shoots you from the doorway. You should have dropped him in the first place and ran.

rogue
05-15-2002, 04:17 PM
Think about this when using your killing techniques, (http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/fight_selfdefense.html)

And this (http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/lethalforce.html)

Shadow Dragon
05-15-2002, 04:30 PM
rogue.

Good site, with some really good info.

Thanks, for posting that.

rogue
05-15-2002, 07:32 PM
You're welcome. I've been a fan of MacYoung for a while, but that's the first time I read those articles. Put things in a good perspective for me.

scotty1
05-16-2002, 05:52 AM
That whole website is excellent.

I like his style:

"Standing there, nose-to-nose, calling the guy a c0cksucker so he swings at you is NOT self-defense"

Great :)

dezhen2001
05-16-2002, 07:08 AM
Rogue: great links, made a lot of sense :)

david