How effective are Martial Arts in Self Defence

[masterblaster12]

I truly believe the best defence is a Gun.
1 You dont know if Opponent is stronger than you.
2 You dont know if he is Armed
3 You dont know his pain tolerance
4 You dont know if he is on Drugs like steriods = Steriod Rage, PCP = No Pain etc.
5 He may be a Total Psychopath

Which Martial Art for Realistic Street Defence .
Well I would chose a combination of the following:
Krav Maga Excellent Disarming Techniques in very Dangerouse situations.
Military Unarmed Combat Teaches you to survive kill or be killed techniques no messing about.
Jeet Kune Do yes can be a good system provided you have good instructors who train towards realistic self defence & mental toughness.
Wing Chun Yes Combat Wing Chun is excellent but again only would join class whose aims are teaching you street defence and showing you how to Disarm Attackers.
Muay Thai & Kyokushinkai Karate the only two Hard Contact Martial Arts that I truly respect as both arts can & will teach you how to give & recieve punishment but I would still add Krav Maga Disarming Techniques to all Martial Arts to complete your system towards realistic Street fighting techniques.
Grappling Excellent to learn as most fights go to the Ground.
I recomend Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, Gene Lebells Jiu Jitsu System, Sombo, Judo, Jiu Jitsu & Even Aikido.
But Grappling on its own is useless if ambushed by a Gang. You must learn Grappling & Striking combined to be a total effective fighter. Also Disarming Techniques if in the street. I know many Martial Artist who have frozen when confronting Knife Stick Chain or any other number of weapons.
Remember the way you train is the way you react in a fight.
Knowledge = Power.
As for Tae Kwon Do or Shotokan well I wish you luck in a Street encounter.

[PangQuan]

I truly believe the best defence is a Gun.
1 You dont know if Opponent is stronger than you.
2 You dont know if he is Armed
3 You dont know his pain tolerance
4 You dont know if he is on Drugs like steriods = Steriod Rage, PCP = No Pain etc.
5 He may be a Total Psychopath

Which Martial Art for Realistic Street Defence .
Well I would chose a combination of the following:
Krav Maga Excellent Disarming Techniques in very Dangerouse situations.
Military Unarmed Combat Teaches you to survive kill or be killed techniques no messing about.
Jeet Kune Do yes can be a good system provided you have good instructors who train towards realistic self defence & mental toughness.
Wing Chun Yes Combat Wing Chun is excellent but again only would join class whose aims are teaching you street defence and showing you how to Disarm Attackers.
Muay Thai & Kyokushinkai Karate the only two Hard Contact Martial Arts that I truly respect as both arts can & will teach you how to give & recieve punishment but I would still add Krav Maga Disarming Techniques to all Martial Arts to complete your system towards realistic Street fighting techniques.
Grappling Excellent to learn as most fights go to the Ground.
I recomend Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, Gene Lebells Jiu Jitsu System, Sombo, Judo, Jiu Jitsu & Even Aikido.
But Grappling on its own is useless if ambushed by a Gang. You must learn Grappling & Striking combined to be a total effective fighter. Also Disarming Techniques if in the street. I know many Martial Artist who have frozen when confronting Knife Stick Chain or any other number of weapons.
Remember the way you train is the way you react in a fight.
Knowledge = Power.
As for Tae Kwon Do or Shotokan well I wish you luck in a Street encounter.

i would say each martial art has something to offer. you just have to know what your after. if it is strictly self defense of the un armed nature, any style that is being correctly represented by the instructor will have something to offer.

from there it is all personal preference and research.

i agree, today's best defense is a gun. but thats not always a likely scenario either.

the best any of us can do is train hard and see what happens.

[masterblaster12]

I think most Martial Arts Schools today teach garbage in regards self defence.
The only true way to know if your skills are going to work on a street fight is if one you have excellent cardio vascular two you are extremely aggressive three you are in good physical shape that means bag work sparring flexibility grappling techniques muay thai kickboxing & lots of disarming techniques.
Train with body armour & helmet get a student to attack you with knife stick & baseball bat practice various disarming techniques. As for disarming a Gun thats Hollywood yes there are techniques but one squeeze of the trigger and you can kiss your life goodbye.
Also body must be conditioned to take impact you must be able to take kicks & punches to the stomach . Also using head protection get used to taking blows to the head. Running is also excellent do roadwork so you dont get out of breath in a fight. Yeah train hard but train smart if the Martial Artist just practises Katas & Stupid flowery movements he or she wont last 5 seconds in a street confrontation.
Simple train to totally destroy your attacker. No mercy fighting techniques. There is no referee to stop the fight in the street or protect you. Street = No Rules.
When your attacker is in the floor dont stop kicking & punching until the attacker is out cold if he gets up you could be in trouble.
Learn to break bones using both grappling & striking techniques combined.
If you practice Wing Chun also add Grappling & Disarming Techniques to your arsenal. Thats how you have a chance. Myself I rather shoot the Punk.

[Kapten Klutz]

You might want to think about another issue which is not going to jail because of excessive force.

[PangQuan]

if someone has a gun, i give them what they want willingly.

if they have a blade or stick, i fight, depending on the individual, and whether there is a group or just one person.

the gun = permit, license, and a concealed weapon permit to have authorized usage.

not to mention you will have to justify any reasons why you were required to use your fire arm, in a court of law.

[Cobra Commander]

if someone has a gun, i give them what they want willingly.

if they have a blade or stick, i fight, depending on the individual, and whether there is a group or just one person.

the gun = permit, license, and a concealed weapon permit to have authorized usage.

not to mention you will have to justify any reasons why you were required to use your fire arm, in a court of law.

LOL if someone had a blade OR a gun, i'd say I stand the chance of becoming seriously hurt or dead. Thats just being honest.

SO I'd do my best to give them what they want, unless of course it was my manhood lol!

But seriously, I'd say a blade can be a very dangerous tool even if your attacker is not experienced with it. Thats what Sifu taught me.

[PangQuan]

a gun of course.

a blade can be a dangerous tool, i just have this thing about me.

if someone tries to use oppresion against me or anyone else, if i have a chance to serve, them i will.


depends on the blade of course, but there is an old saying, sheathing the sword.

you take a hit to drop your man. ill take a cut or shank purposefully on many parts of my body to finish my assailant.

on that note however, if i venture into hoods where things like this go down, i always have my own blade.

im not too worried about knifes as it would be a knife fight, guns are different.

you have to be realistic in a knife encounter. chances are you WILL be cut or stabbed. a high chance.

with that in mind you have to plan ahead and get hit where YOU want it, but with correct follow up.

of course if i have someone with me, ill just play along, if im alone though...eye of the tiger baby.

in this age, people shy away from using knives to hold people up. guns are too easy to get.

[Cobra Commander]

a gun of course.

a blade can be a dangerous tool, i just have this thing about me.

if someone tries to use oppresion against me or anyone else, if i have a chance to serve, them i will.


depends on the blade of course, but there is an old saying, sheathing the sword.

you take a hit to drop your man. ill take a cut or shank purposefully on many parts of my body to finish my assailant.

on that note however, if i venture into hoods where things like this go down, i always have my own blade.

im not too worried about knifes as it would be a knife fight, guns are different.

you have to be realistic in a knife encounter. chances are you WILL be cut or stabbed. a high chance.

with that in mind you have to plan ahead and get hit where YOU want it, but with correct follow up.

of course if i have someone with me, ill just play along, if im alone though...eye of the tiger baby.

in this age, people shy away from using knives to hold people up. guns are too easy to get.

That is true. It IS possible to beat a guy down who has a blade. You can hit him a dozen times and even knock him out but, what if he cuts you a few times or even once in a vital area and you bleed to death later while he regains conciousness in a hospital? Just a scenario, not trying to butt heads with you lol.

[PangQuan]

no i totally get what your saying.

i would only attack a guy weilding a knife, if i had at my disposal a means of killing or incapasitating him quickly. a blade of my own, or a bludgeoning tool.

but keep in mind, i generally carry a weapon everywhere i go. from a knife to a pair of nunchaku.

on my way to and from class i always have a 6' ratan staff. or as i like to call it, the ol' bone breaker.

[dwid]

You have to consider that a gun isn't the holy grail of self defense.

Don't get me wrong. I have a permit and I carry, but when sh!t jumps off, there are issues of being able to draw and retain. You need to exercise a certain level of vigilance in order to see a threat before it invades your space, at which point, drawing and retaining are substantially more likely to be compromised.

So, while a gun may be as good a defense as you can get, I look at it as a piece and not the entirety of my personal protection.

As far as legal issues go, you're more likely to go to jail for beating someone than for shooting them if you follow the law and don't pull your gun unless your life is seriously threatened. Let me give an example to illustrate from a case that actually happened here in Columbus.

A guy wakes up in the middle of the night to noises in his house. He is on the second floor and hears people on the first floor. He grabs a bat and catches the first of two burglars off-guard. The perp was armed with a shotgun and so the guy hit him with the bat until he went down, and maybe a few more times until he seemed incapacitated. He then grabs the shotgun and shoots the other guy. I believe both burglars died. However, he was only charged with the first assault, as even though the fight was bat vs. shotgun, it was deemed that hitting the guy as many times as he did was excessive force, whereas he only shot the other guy once - not excessive.

If you carry, even legally, you may well find yourself having to go to court over shooting someone, but you will be no worse off (and quite possibly better off) than if you beat the sh!t out of someone or cut/stab them. The law is funny that way.

[Cobra Commander]

You have to consider that a gun isn't the holy grail of self defense.

Don't get me wrong. I have a permit and I carry, but when sh!t jumps off, there are issues of being able to draw and retain. You need to exercise a certain level of vigilance in order to see a threat before it invades your space, at which point, drawing and retaining are substantially more likely to be compromised.

So, while a gun may be as good a defense as you can get, I look at it as a piece and not the entirety of my personal protection.

As far as legal issues go, you're more likely to go to jail for beating someone than for shooting them if you follow the law and don't pull your gun unless your life is seriously threatened. Let me give an example to illustrate from a case that actually happened here in Columbus.

A guy wakes up in the middle of the night to noises in his house. He is on the second floor and hears people on the first floor. He grabs a bat and catches the first of two burglars off-guard. The perp was armed with a shotgun and so the guy hit him with the bat until he went down, and maybe a few more times until he seemed incapacitated. He then grabs the shotgun and shoots the other guy. I believe both burglars died. However, he was only charged with the first assault, as even though the fight was bat vs. shotgun, it was deemed that hitting the guy as many times as he did was excessive force, whereas he only shot the other guy once - not excessive.

If you carry, even legally, you may well find yourself having to go to court over shooting someone, but you will be no worse off (and quite possibly better off) than if you beat the sh!t out of someone or cut/stab them. The law is funny that way.

The law only works for Mike Tyson, who can literally at the drop of a hat exit his vehicle enraged and,
beat the living daylights out of you or me and get away with it.
Hell he can even throw in some knee blast to your testicles and headbutt you. Add a lethal bite to your thigh or ears and he gets cuffed the same week and, the next week he'll be having his photo's taken with some pretty women in Brazil.

On the other hand, I'm sure if Mike Tyson was shooting people from a roof top or committing drivebye's, he'd be either serving a triple life sentence or be facing the death penalty.

Yeah the law IS FUNNY.

[Samurai Jack]

I'm not all that certain that a gun represents the best defensive value for most self-defense situations. In cases where your opponent isn't threatening lethal force i.e. armed with a knife or gun, then YOUR weapon represents a serious liability.

For example, if you draw your weapon against an unarmed assailant and the moron dosen't back down (seen this happen in my youth), what the hell do you do? Shoot him? What if you shoot him accidentally? It's happened before. Either way, that's murder in the eyes of any court. And if he starts fighting you and you haven't drawn your weapon, how much harder is it to fight him while keeping him from taking your gun? Not to mention what happens if he succeeds in grabbing it.

The only time you'd want your gun IMO, is if your opponent has one. In which case you're pretty screwed anyway because you stand a very good chance of being killed or accidentally killing a bystander should you choose to deploy your weapon rather than just meet his demands.

Just playing devil's advocate...

[dwid]

Well, I'll be honest. I don't get into brawls. I haven't been in a for real fight (outside of the gym) since Junior High School.

Any situation in which I am being physically assaulted and I cannot get away is a situation in which lethal force would be justifiable in my mind. People die or are permanently disabled from complications from unarmed assaults all the time. Furthermore, people often survive being shot, so you can't assume that just because you shoot some guy, he's going to die.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who puts the lives of me or those I love in danger, whether wielding a weapon or not, is doing so at great personal risk.

Finally, while the argument about having a good chance of being killed or killing a bystander simply doesn't hold up. Show me the statistics on people who legally carry firearms accidentally shooting themselves or others. It doesn't happen. Furthermore, cops get in gunfights all the time without injuring bystanders or being killed themselves, and cops are by and large some of the worst shots imaginable. I spend more time at the shooting range than the vast majority of police officers do. Use common sense, good judgment, gun safety, and be ever mindful of your lines of fire, and it's highly unlikely you'll shoot anyone you don't intend to.

[Kapten Klutz]

Use common sense, good judgment, gun safety, and be ever mindful of your lines of fire, and it's highly unlikely you'll shoot anyone you don't intend to.

Have you ever tested this when the bad guys were also shooting at you?

[dwid]

The point is, that it's not a given that you're going to kill some innocent bystander or get shot yourself. No, I've never been under fire, and I hope that I never am. I hope I'm never in a situation where I have to choose between injuring or killing another human being or being injured or killed myself. It's a terrible position to be in. Even police officers and soldiers are traumatized when they have to take a life - it's a terrible thing.

However, I'm not going to let the fear of unpredictable outcomes in such a scenario keep me from taking steps to protect myself and those I love. The point I was trying to make was that perhaps Samurai Jack was a bit extreme in his predictions about the likely outcomes of having to use a firearm to protect yourself. As I stated early in this thread, I agree that firearms aren't the be-all end-all solution to every self-defense problem. However, I do believe they are an important component to practical self-defense. It is simply naiive to believe that you can counter every attack scenario with empty hand tech's or melee weapons. Guns are a reality of the modern era, and people ignore this reality at their peril.