Thread: Tell me about martial arts.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

It's surprising when you read up on anatomy just how many weak points the human body has.

You need only basic knowledge of anatomy to destruct parts of body. Of course master knowledge of human body involves usage of pressure points. However, I also know lots of people who think pressure points are the greatest arsenal we have. Truth is, they are very good way to spice up some techniques, but they should never ever be primary target in my opinion. They are fascinating of course, in scientifical sense. I primarly use them in locks and grappling. People seem to be often amazed when they ask about pressure KO etc.. what most people don't know, easiest way to use them is just hit the jaw. Lots of points there. '^

Originally Posted by Photolysis

I seem to remember that it involves hand to hand combat as well as various other weapon skills, such as throwing stars, and also incorporates elements of stealth?

True. Traditional ninjutsu has many skills used in guerilla warfare. For example even geography and weather prediction was taught. Too bad ninjutsu is shrouded in mystery and bullshit, especially here in teh internezt. Critical approach people, critical approach.

To hercuflea : here in Finland.. umm.. that sounds quite ridicilous when seen from viewpoint of law. no offence for anyone in the States.

You need only basic knowledge of anatomy to destruct parts of body. Of course master knowledge of human body involves usage of pressure points. However, I also know lots of people who think pressure points are the greatest arsenal we have. Truth is, they are very good way to spice up some techniques, but they should never ever be primary target in my opinion. They are fascinating of course, in scientifical sense. I primarly use them in locks and grappling. People seem to be often amazed when they ask about pressure KO etc.. what most people don't know, easiest way to use them is just hit the jaw. Lots of points there. '^

As I understand it, pressure points are useful if you need to subdue someone without causing permanent damage; even simple finger locks can cause a lot of pain as you are no doubt aware of! I think riot police tend to make use of these techniques to restrain people?

But in a combat situation, it seems kind of unlikely that you'd be able to take advantage of the receptors in the neck to knock someone out. As you say, it's easier to just hit them! And against a professional who knows what they are doing, it's not going to be anywhere near as effective, though I suppose it could be useful for manipulating him in to certain positions so you can strike more effectively... I guess it depends on the situation.

Also pressure points are far from reliable. For some people they work, for some they work less and some are fairly immune to certain pressure points. But I have studied ways to rip and maim muscles if necessary. Anatomy knowledge is indeed useful but well.. its just bonus

But they are indeed useful for subduing without permanent damage. You just have to know how, when, why do it. It's far from field of amateurs. But as I said, I don't like them very much. Some extra pain spikes when grappling and such. In martial community they are also considered as "dirty tactics" by many.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

But in a combat situation, it seems kind of unlikely that you'd be able to take advantage of the receptors in the neck to knock someone out. As you say, it's easier to just hit them! And against a professional who knows what they are doing, it's not going to be anywhere near as effective, though I suppose it could be useful for manipulating him in to certain positions so you can strike more effectively... I guess it depends on the situation.

Many effective pressure points are on the arms and legs... If someone swings at you, you can catch it, and cause a bit of pain with just a finger. And if you are down on the ground, you could reverse the situation by hitting certain points with a hammer fist. Still, you are right, many knock out ones are on the head, neck, and chest which are easily defended.

About them being used to cause subdue people without serious damage, most of the knockout points have a "risk of death" attached to them...

Unelias is right though, its not always the same for everyone... I know this, since a few just don't work on me. (mainly in the arms)

Yeah it's pretty much official, my choice is Filipino Kali/Eskrima/Arnis

Go to the 1:00 mark then watch this chick go, geez

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD7BhuC_DlQ

Well good luck then but remember to keep open mind and while this advice might sound cryptic : respect your teachers if they are worth of it, but never listen them blindly after basics. Unless of course you want to be like 90% of martial artists. Arrogant, too prideful, seeing their own style or way of doing, going circles and thinking why there is no developement and why other people progress further. After all, there is only one fighting style and that's how humans fight. With hands, feet, head, teeth. Everything you have

Applies to other things too.

But well hard training. 'nuff said

have fun with it. Hopefully you progress past that chick pretty quickly!

About them being used to cause subdue people without serious damage, most of the knockout points have a "risk of death" attached to them...

I wasn't simply talking about pressure points that can KO someone, I was also including applying pressure to tendons, nerve clusters and joints. Obviously strikes to the temples, base of the skull, neck, or the area above the heart are very dangerous and do have a risk of serious injury. After all, to knock someone out by trauma, you need to essentially cause (hopefully minor and temporary) brain damage.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

I wasn't simply talking about pressure points that can KO someone, I was also including applying pressure to tendons, nerve clusters and joints. Obviously strikes to the temples, base of the skull, neck, or the area above the heart are very dangerous and do have a risk of serious injury. After all, to knock someone out by trauma, you need to essentially cause (hopefully minor and temporary) brain damage.

Well normal kick or punch that connects usually damages internal organs, if done properly. One safety thing I learned when I practiced pressure points is to work for one side only. Because if you activate both sides at the same time the painspikes meet in the middle and carry a great risk of overstraining heart.

For head knockouts it's rarely concussion. Usually it's merely brains shutting down because jaw is full of pressure points. But of course, when enough force is applied it will lead to concussion.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Death shouldn't be the goal.

Death is absolutely the goal. This is self-defense, not pansy dancing. The military doesn't use rubber bullets, does it?

Thats war, not self defense... Self defense is making sure you are alive, not that the opposition is dead...

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Death is absolutely the goal. This is self-defense, not pansy dancing. The military doesn't use rubber bullets, does it?

You kill someone in self defense you go to jail. Reasonable force.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You kill someone in self defense you go to jail. Reasonable force.

You kill someone who's trying to kill you and you go to jail? That's new.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

You kill someone who's trying to kill you and you go to jail? That's new.

In most situations your life is not in danger. The average unarmed attacker is not a serious threat. Depending on skill level not even one man with a switchblade should warrant killing them. Once you get the knife away, if you continue to beat on him, you've become the attacker and will end up in jail.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

In most situations your life is not in danger. The average unarmed attacker is not a serious threat. Depending on skill level not even one man with a switchblade should warrant killing them. Once you get the knife away, if you continue to beat on him, you've become the attacker and will end up in jail.

That's highly doubtful speculation. If you are attacked in any way that threatens your life you are authorized to use lethal force in America.

Originally Posted by Hercuflea

That's highly doubtful speculation. If you are attacked in any way that threatens your life you are authorized to use lethal force in America.

You'd better have a good laywer then

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You'd better have a good laywer then

Seconded...

America doesn't have as lax of laws as you hope. Killing in self defense isn't commonly forgiven...

Originally Posted by ninja9578

In most situations your life is not in danger. The average unarmed attacker is not a serious threat. Depending on skill level not even one man with a switchblade should warrant killing them. Once you get the knife away, if you continue to beat on him, you've become the attacker and will end up in jail.

Why would I break out the deadly art of ninjitsu if I didn't fear for my life?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You'd better have a good laywer then

Not true. It need only be proven that the dead guy demonstrated a clear intent to kill.

drewmandan, do you even know what Ninjutsu is? Its not just killing... Its mostly restraining, and every art is somewhat deadly...

Yea, how do you prove that the dead guy on the ground was a threat to your life?

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Why would I break out the deadly art of ninjitsu if I didn't fear for my life?

Simply knocking someone out or hurting them is often sufficient.

Not true. It need only be proven that the dead guy demonstrated a clear intent to kill.

Wrong. You need to prove that he had the intent to kill and the capability. Someone unarmed is not a threat to a martial arts expert, depedning on skill level a small knife isn't either. And once the knife is gone, his capabili, ty to kill is gone and you can not kill him then. You would also have to prove that you couldn't have simply run away, if you could have gotten away, but chose to fight, then you were the aggressor.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Simply knocking someone out or hurting them is often sufficient.

No, it is not.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Wrong. You need to prove that he had the intent to kill and the capability. Someone unarmed is not a threat to a martial arts expert, depedning on skill level a small knife isn't either. And once the knife is gone, his capabili, ty to kill is gone and you can not kill him then. You would also have to prove that you couldn't have simply run away, if you could have gotten away, but chose to fight, then you were the aggressor.

I disagree.

Yea it is, most people will run if their first attack didn't work...

It doesn't matter if you disagree... The law agrees.

Look, say you are in a bank, and you posess a concealed carry permit, along with the weapon it allows. A man walks in, points a gun at the cashier, and demands money. You pull out your weapon and shoot him.

He is still the aggresor, and you are the hero.

But if he comes up and punches the cashier, you don't have the right to shoot him...