Actually I was not directly addressing your post, but making general comments. I actually agree with you here.
My mistake.

Thank you for the admonition. I do not confuse the two, but I believe many individuals consider grappling a strictly ground fighting circumstance. It is to those people my comments were directed.
Apparently, my mistake again.

I was using hyperbole here to illustrate extremely dangerous situations with seemingly overwhelming odds. The underlying point of my post was that MMA, specifically grappling, is not the “be all” of self-defense. This is the implication intended by many who ask the question underlying the original post of this thread.
Fair enough. I'm sure those that know you understood your point, however since I am new I took your post at face value.

Of course it does, and herein lies the problem for civilized persons. While the civilized care about the consequences of their actions, socio-paths commonly do not. While they are acting brutally to you, you are attempting to defend yourself without incurring legal ramifications. This puts the civilized person at a distinct disadvantage.
I agree.


Again hyperbole used to illustrate that unexpected and brutal methods are the most efficient. Don’t underestimate your enemy is the point here and don’t underestimate your opportunities to overcome your opponent using unconventional means. Don’t underestimate the brutality or unexpected means to which a socio-path is willing to use in an encounter. Sociopaths don’t care about going to prison. This is their strength. You may be afraid to go to prison, this is your weakness.
I understand your point, but I don't personally agree that not wanting to go to prison is a weakness. I think it will re-enforce non-lethal and more humane techniques up and to the point that it comes where it is either you or him. When all of your other options have been removed, IMO, then and only then should you consider lethal and/or crippling techniques. If you start of with the pure brutality that the sociopath is most likely using, what really makes you any different than him?

I am not advocating these methods. However, a careful study of strategy and tactics requires us to consider them. One of the reasons Samurai hated Ninjas so much was because the Ninja only cared about winning, not winning according to some principle of fair play. Therefore, they would not meet force with force unless it was absolutely necessary. Many Samurai restricted their efficiency and ability by conforming to a specific code of conduct in combat. To the mind of many Samurai the Ninja was a cheater because he didn’t play by the Samurai’s preconceived notions of fair combat. This was the Samurai’s weakness and the Ninja’s strength.
Yes, Ninjas were generally viewed as cowards and honorless by the Samurai due the win at any cost using any means available tactics the ninja would use (ex: poison under the fingernails or on their blades, ambushing, traps, etc). One of the tenets still practiced in ninjutsu is that any time there is contact from your enemy, it could be fatal (for the reasons stated above), so many of the techniques dodge/evade attacks instead of purely block.

My perspective on this topic comes from my years working around, talking to, and observing prison inmates. These are the sociopaths that will kill for a dime and rape your dead body. They do not play by the rules of civilized combat. They play to WIN!! This MUST be considered when one is talking about MMA or any other type of self-defense system as the ultimate means or even the best means available.
A very good point.

An idiot with no MMA experience and a gun or a baseball bat can easily neutralized the toughest, meanest, best trained person around. No method is the best. It is the best according to a specific context. Change the context and all the years of training, sweating and thinking you are a bad dude can be snuffed out in a second. The only thing left on your face is an amazed disbelief that you could be taken out so easily.
Another good point, although I would disagree that the idiot with the baseball bat could easily take out a well trained martial artist (assuming the martial artist was not caught unawares). I'm not saying that it wouldn't happen, just that it wouldn't be easy.

These comments are not addressed to you specifically, but to anyone who thinks that any method of self-defense is the best or that some other method is useless.
Understood.

It does not take any self-defense/fighting experience to take a person out. All it takes is a strategic and devious mind. It is important to keep this in mind if a person is attempting to fight or train to address their feelings of insecurity or boost their ego. It is my impression that many who want to poo poo traditional arts for not competing in MMA tournaments have a misguided impression of the realities of life concerning real life combat and the extent to which sociopaths will go to hurt you and take what is yours. So my purpose here has been to bring some real life into the discussion.
While I do not agree with you completely, you did bring some very good and valid points to the discussion and I for one, appreciate the debate.