Posted by: Donte
what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/21/05 11:01 PM
just wondering if anyone knew........cause i dont
what martial art was origanly ment for killing?
Posted by: modernwarrior
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/22/05 02:59 PM
I would say Kenjutsu and Ninjutsu. Im not sure if anyone would agree? Both of those arts were durived during a time where the samurai and ninja had to fight to the death. They werent out to score points thats for sure.
Posted by: cxt
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/22/05 04:31 PM
Donte
Dude pretty much ALL of them--that was the original intent of all "martial" arts.
Eastern, western, etc.
Why all the questions about killing and all--your posting these on a number or threads--why?
Dude pretty much ALL of them--that was the original intent of all "martial" arts.
Eastern, western, etc.
Why all the questions about killing and all--your posting these on a number or threads--why?
Posted by: Donte
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/22/05 05:08 PM
Quote:
Donte
Dude pretty much ALL of them--that was the original intent of all "martial" arts.
that is not true, tae kwon dow was spacificaly made in koria by farmers that kept on getting theyr crops stolen
karate was made just to defend one's self
and most martial arts were not ment for kiling, but i know theyr are like 5 or 6 and i want to leanr them
Eastern, western, etc.
Why all the questions about killing and all--your posting these on a number or threads--why?
Posted by: cxt
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/22/05 05:38 PM
Donte
Actually most TKD was largely based on Okinawan/Japanese karate which itself was not "really" developed by farmers.
Karate was developed as a "last ditch" method of fighting for your life. And its form and function was pretty much used to save yourself and inflict grevious harm on your attacker--up to and including killing him.
Defending ones self and killing are a pretty fine line--often a question of semantics rather than design, as far as arts go.
If you wish to discuss karate etc then please address your question the proper forum--this is the Daito forum and questions pertaining to karate/tkd and the like do not belong here.
I will answer no more questions about arts not asked on the correct forum.
Happy to discuss them on the right one though.
Posted by: Donte
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/22/05 11:34 PM
Quote:
Donte
Actually most TKD was largely based on Okinawan/Japanese karate which itself was not "really" developed by farmers.
Karate was developed as a "last ditch" method of fighting for your life. And its form and function was pretty much used to save yourself and inflict grevious harm on your attacker--up to and including killing him.
Defending ones self and killing are a pretty fine line--often a question of semantics rather than design, as far as arts go.
If you wish to discuss karate etc then please address your question the proper forum--this is the Daito forum and questions pertaining to karate/tkd and the like do not belong here.
I will answer no more questions about arts not asked on the correct forum.
Happy to discuss them on the right one though.
...you make me sad
Posted by: Donte
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 05/25/05 01:36 PM
Quote:
I would say Kenjutsu and Ninjutsu. Im not sure if anyone would agree? Both of those arts were durived during a time where the samurai and ninja had to fight to the death. They werent out to score points thats for sure.
ok i reaserched that and thats sword fighting and ib dont really do that (by the way i cant spell great sorry)
but i had hear of a martial are called showshoe.......... i know i didnt spell it right but thats now it sounds..........anyone heard of it ,some old man told me to look into it
Posted by: Ktulu
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 06/05/05 05:53 PM
Every single martial art out there, was at one point used to defend yourself if you lost your sword or weapon on the battlefield. They all were lethal and extremely effective. They would usually learn weak points in their opponents armor and where and how to stike their opponents to kill them or imobilize them, and they would also have to learn how to move in thier own armor. Now a days most martial arts are taught for self improvement and perfection of one self, Or for competition. But as far as I know every single martial art traced back far enough was deadly and could be used for killing. But I dont know why you would wanna kill anybody these days unless you plan to be in a war.
Posted by: glad2bhere
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 06/22/05 10:56 AM
All martial arts are meant for killing.
The difference is how this fact is worked with by various arts, styles and schools. Most places "sneak-up" on the fact by teaching the most superficial and non-lethal material first and saving the most lethal for later.
Some places teach the lethal material up front and just let the chips fall as they may.
Some sanitize their material by taking what might have originated as a lethal technique and shifted it to pain compliance, a throw or a lock instead of a choke or break, thrust or cut.
In todays modern world, most of what you find is "Civilian" arts not "martial" arts. This does not make them bad. I just think its important not to kid ourselves about what it is that is taught, what is learned and why, thats all. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
The difference is how this fact is worked with by various arts, styles and schools. Most places "sneak-up" on the fact by teaching the most superficial and non-lethal material first and saving the most lethal for later.
Some places teach the lethal material up front and just let the chips fall as they may.
Some sanitize their material by taking what might have originated as a lethal technique and shifted it to pain compliance, a throw or a lock instead of a choke or break, thrust or cut.
In todays modern world, most of what you find is "Civilian" arts not "martial" arts. This does not make them bad. I just think its important not to kid ourselves about what it is that is taught, what is learned and why, thats all. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
Posted by: Ubermint
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 06/23/05 04:39 AM
First of all, it's called fragging, and the first thing you need to do is master circle strafing. Now there are several different styles of play you can use, like camping,-
Wait, we're not playing quake here?
Oh, I see. Well in the real world, secret death techniques are urban legends.
Wait, we're not playing quake here?
Oh, I see. Well in the real world, secret death techniques are urban legends.
Posted by: glad2bhere
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/06/05 04:08 PM
Stepping on a windpipe is not an urban legend. Neither is fracturing a joint, knee-dropping in a solar-plexus, putting a thumb INTO another persons' eye or choking an adversary until they stop moving. Most teachers shy away from this material because they don't want to be liable if a student actually uses any of this. Thats why there is so much of this emphasis on the more benign aspects of MA. I just don't kid myself that it was originally intended to make everybody all warm and cozy towards their fellow man. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
Best Wishes,
Bruce
Posted by: Ubermint
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 03:47 AM
Quote:
Stepping on a windpipe is not an urban legend.
Nope, did it today in BJJ (actually it was my knee, so TECHNICALITIES AHOY, I GUESS ITS JUST A SPORT AFTER ALL). It's a really dirtbag combination of knee on stomach and fist to throat choke.
Quote:
Neither is fracturing a joint,
Armbar.
Quote:
knee-dropping in a solar-plexus,
The aforementioned knee on stomach. Hold on...why, after slamming in knee rides, and (more often) being slammed under knee rides, doing the exact same "knee-drop" you described, is none of my academy dead yet?
Quote:
putting a thumb INTO another persons' eye
Ooh, spooky. Did you come up with this by yourself, or did you read a few TSR ads beforehand?
Quote:
or choking an adversary until they stop moving.
That's the "[censored] variation" of the rear naked choke. Technically the same, you just don't let go when he taps. But as I said, only complete [censored] do that.
But none of those are what was being reffered to anyway. The original poster was looking for SUPER SECRET TECHNIQUES OF HEART EXPLOSION GLUBGLUB CHOKING ON MY OWN GENITALS HERE, and that's what i'm addressing.
There are no secret techniques. There is nothing you can learn that will allow you to injure somebody without a long period of hard contact sparring and physical conditioning. There is only those who have a real, athletic delivery system and those who don't.
Looking for the MOST DEADLY martial art is a waste of time. Get on the mat. Roll. Spar. Get thrown, punched, kicked. After months of getting tapped out, beaten, etc. you will be objectively much more dangerous in a fight.
But hopefully you will have understood that it is better to release those feelings of aggresion in a healthy environment, instead of letting fear, paranoia, anger and even sadness infect your daily life.
Posted by: MattJ
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 08:58 AM
Uber -
Yes, sparring is good. Let's have a little less graphic imagery, OK?
Yes, sparring is good. Let's have a little less graphic imagery, OK?
Posted by: glad2bhere
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 09:31 AM
I think the point I was seeking to make was that it was rather comical to me to see someone asking what "martial art" was meant for killing. To me its a little like asking what gun is intended for shooting or what knife is meant for cutting. Almost without exception arts practiced today are "civilian arts". By this I mean that for reasons of regular practice and functioning in modern society the intention or the application has been moderated in deference to the niceties of society. Maybe contributors here don't practice with lethal intent and thats OK. In most modern Western Countries people don't have to worry about being attacked with a machete or a panga. The probability of having to actually act in defense of ones' life is relatively small.
I teach Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido, arguably a very nasty art. Know what the biggest challenge in the class is? Getting some student to actual conceive of the need to hurt another person in the name of protecting oneself.
The art is not in the body. Its in the mind. It is a matter of being willing to do what is necessary-- rationally; objectively; efficiently; effectively---- without hesitation. I think these were the points I was working to stress. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
I teach Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido, arguably a very nasty art. Know what the biggest challenge in the class is? Getting some student to actual conceive of the need to hurt another person in the name of protecting oneself.
The art is not in the body. Its in the mind. It is a matter of being willing to do what is necessary-- rationally; objectively; efficiently; effectively---- without hesitation. I think these were the points I was working to stress. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
Posted by: JoelM
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 11:26 AM
Quote:
But none of those are what was being reffered to anyway. The original poster was looking for SUPER SECRET TECHNIQUES OF HEART EXPLOSION GLUBGLUB CHOKING ON MY OWN GENITALS HERE, and that's what i'm addressing.
Unless you are the original poster, you have no idea what he was referring to. He did not say anything about those "techniques" so you are addressing crap. You are just here to try and find some moral highground about what you do and look down with impunity on others who are either misinformed about things or choose to do otherwise. Your disrespectful attitude is not welcomed here.
Posted by: Ubermint
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 03:45 PM
Quote:
Unless you are the original poster, you have no idea what he was referring to. He did not say anything about those "techniques" so you are addressing crap. You are just here to try and find some moral highground about what you do and look down with impunity on others who are either misinformed about things or choose to do otherwise.
"What martial art was originally meant for killing?". Does that sound like a well adjusted, informed question to you?
Can you honestly say you'd react without at least a touch of incredulity if someone walked into your school and asked you or your teacher that?
Quote:
Your disrespectful attitude is not welcomed here.
Then ban me, and have a bullshido.net flood all over the collective eyes, ears, mouth, face of this forum.*
*check me out, i'm making stooopid internet threats. Guess I never had the moral high ground to begin with.
Posted by: MattJ
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 04:44 PM
Flood from Bullshido? Har har.
Most of them don't give a damn about this site, so that makes your threat rather hollow. I have personally welcomed many people on Bullshido to hang out here as well, and some have. Most with better manners than you.
And in case you did not realize, there is a sizable MMA population on this site. With their own forum now!
When will you realize that all your swagger and attitude is simply going to turn off the very people you wish to inform? Not very productive is it? There are certainly better ways to go about it. Aim your message for the audience, sir.
Unless you are here strictly to troll?
Most of them don't give a damn about this site, so that makes your threat rather hollow. I have personally welcomed many people on Bullshido to hang out here as well, and some have. Most with better manners than you.
And in case you did not realize, there is a sizable MMA population on this site. With their own forum now!
When will you realize that all your swagger and attitude is simply going to turn off the very people you wish to inform? Not very productive is it? There are certainly better ways to go about it. Aim your message for the audience, sir.
Unless you are here strictly to troll?
Posted by: glad2bhere
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/07/05 05:15 PM
Dear Ubermint:
".....Then ban me, and have a bullshido.net flood all over the collective eyes, ears, mouth, face of this forum.*...."
Most often when I go to a Masonic meeting there are people who are not there for the ritual, or the history or the legacy of the Masonic Order. They are there because they are lonely, empty retirees who have given everything they ever had to chasing consumerism or a career. Now with that gone they realize their mistake and its actually too late for them.
As I read many of the posts--- in fact many of the threads here--- I come to realize that the use of the term "martial arts" as I have known it for 30 years is NOT what people here are about. In this case, "martial arts" is a buzzword that people are using as an excuse to recreate. This would not be so bad except that about 50% of the time the recreation in the name of "martial arts" is at someone elses' expense. Kinda like what you just demonstrated. And even THIS would not be so bad except that I notice that anyone speaking to a higher order of behavior is not embraced but rebuked. Odd thing, that. Rebuking someone aspiring to a higher order in the name of an activity dedicated to a higher order, ne? No real point to this. Just musing out loud, as it were.
Regards.
".....Then ban me, and have a bullshido.net flood all over the collective eyes, ears, mouth, face of this forum.*...."
Most often when I go to a Masonic meeting there are people who are not there for the ritual, or the history or the legacy of the Masonic Order. They are there because they are lonely, empty retirees who have given everything they ever had to chasing consumerism or a career. Now with that gone they realize their mistake and its actually too late for them.
As I read many of the posts--- in fact many of the threads here--- I come to realize that the use of the term "martial arts" as I have known it for 30 years is NOT what people here are about. In this case, "martial arts" is a buzzword that people are using as an excuse to recreate. This would not be so bad except that about 50% of the time the recreation in the name of "martial arts" is at someone elses' expense. Kinda like what you just demonstrated. And even THIS would not be so bad except that I notice that anyone speaking to a higher order of behavior is not embraced but rebuked. Odd thing, that. Rebuking someone aspiring to a higher order in the name of an activity dedicated to a higher order, ne? No real point to this. Just musing out loud, as it were.
Regards.
Posted by: JoelM
Re: what martial art was origanly ment for killing? - 07/08/05 01:22 AM
Quote:
check me out, i'm making stooopid internet threats. Guess I never had the moral high ground to begin with.
Took you this long to figure it out? I knew it from the beginning.
Threaten all you want, flood all you want, the idiots will be dealt with just as they have been before.
Have a nice life.
Posted by: alfa