PDA

View Full Version : Fighting/Self-Defense ?



Loddfafner
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 07:47 PM
Which is worse? To fight when it is unnecessary, or to refuse to fight when it is necessary?

This question came to mind after a comical -- but potentially tragic -- evening out with some members of the Subculture that Shall Not Be Named. One guy proudly announced that he had just punched someone who had insulted his girlfriend, while another rather drunkenly stated that he was looking for a reason to fight anyone. I suggested that he go after anyone wearing green. It was, after all, the weekend of St. Patrick's Day, and the streets were full of garishly-dressed gaggles of bar-hoppers that embarrased the Irish portion of my bloodline. I then realized that the bar we were in was so dark that I had overlooked that he, too, was wearing green, though not that day-glo shade.

mischak
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 07:59 PM
Depends what kind of "fighting" you're referring to. If you're talking about a brawl between two people, then I'd say it's worse to look for unnecessary fights. Very rarely do people "need" to fight someone. I don't generally don't associate with these type people, as I find it rather unimpressive and "ghetto" when people resort to physical violence because they can't communicate or socialize with eachother in a more appropriate, civilized manner.

Thrymheim
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 08:05 PM
I think mischak has said everything that need to be said about individuals but if it is countries we are talking about then refusing to fight when it is nessesary is probably a worse problem, as it often leads to worse fighting in the long run also it is what will cause a country to loose it's independance and identity.

Death and the Sun
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 08:18 PM
Fighting unnecessarily and not fighting when necessary are both bad; but all in all imo it is worse not to fight when you should, rather than the opposite.

Renwein
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 08:29 PM
If you fight when it's unnecessary you can almost always make up afterwards...
but if you don't when you should it might be too late to 'make up' what you should have stood for. IMO

Loddfafner
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 09:34 PM
One factor that complicates the question is how, and how well, one can determine necessity, given how often the appearance of necessity for violent conflict is exaggerated by the sort that thrives on drama.

If necessity to fight is an objective fact, then consider this philosophical twist: a fight (or a war) becomes an event caused by a future contingency. Logically, causes precede their effects, but here, perhaps, is an exception.

theTasmanian
Sunday, March 16th, 2008, 09:36 PM
It is very rare to "have" to fight.....more self defence even then its still rare as you can always talk your way out

we had on 60 minutes(current affairs show) last night about the drunken violence in the city's lots of people just go out get drunk and only want to fight......its got me stuffed

but when you have "numbers" of people wanting to kick your head in its necessary to defend yourself

the square of and fight one on one is more or less dead........

Angelcynn Beorn
Monday, March 17th, 2008, 02:27 AM
Fight when you feel you need to. You'll quickly learn where you stand in the pecking order if you keep going home covered in cuts and bruises. But sometimes cuts and bruises are a lot less damaging than the psychological impact of being walked all over by someone else just because they knew you were too scared to fight.

Learn the downsides of both, and choose your poison. ;)

Cuchulain
Monday, March 17th, 2008, 02:50 AM
Fighting unnecessarily is stupid and shows a lack self control, but not fighting when you should is cowardly. I find stupidity far easier to forgive- we have all done plenty of stupid things. Cowardice is a reflection of poor character and tends to be a behavior pattern of certain individuals.

Loftor
Friday, March 21st, 2008, 09:18 PM
I used to make all sorts of excuses for not fighting until I got a punch bag. Actually being able to throw a punch helps. Now I think standing your ground is very important. ;-) A £5 army kitbag filled with towels and a £1 hook from the hardware store and a bit of rope is all you need. Also physical confidence is sexy in a man and a woman.

This is my actual punch bag, go on give it one, a punch not a brush off. ;-)

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/5140/img07201uq9.jpg

Soldier of Wodann
Friday, March 21st, 2008, 09:32 PM
People here seem to look at fighting in a very superstitious, feminine, and pretentious way. Over coming fear of physical injury to uphold a virtue (over coming fear of physical injury is itself a virtue really) is probably one of the most valiant things a man can do. Fighting is a good way to relieve stress and exercise, I do it with my friends as often as possible. It strengthens you both physically and mentally, when one no longer has a strong fear of pain things always look clearer. :)

That being said, thugishness should in no way be tolerated, but if one sees a good and just opportunity to engage in such an activity, they should go for it.

theTasmanian
Saturday, March 22nd, 2008, 12:40 AM
Wise man once said" walk quietly...but carry a big stick"

i like this saying as i know i have 15 years of jujitsu behind my walking quietly

i use to fight plenty in my younger days but now im my 30's i have very little need to prove to myself that I'm "tough" i do how ever need my firearms licence of which will be taken from me should i beat the living crap out of some one who will most likely deserve it;)

OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, March 23rd, 2008, 02:14 PM
I'm too wimpy to fight. I don't look puny, I just don't want to incur any damage :o

Octothorpe
Thursday, June 26th, 2008, 05:03 PM
I thought from the poll we were talking about nation-states, but the individual also has a duty to protect oneself from the idiots that surround us all. I'm a large fellow (6'3'', 300 lbs.) who's had military experience and martial arts training (just enough to defend myself--no silly chop-socky stuff), so usually no one bothers me. However, even the smallest person can learn skills that can make them a hard target to malefactors and morons alike. I feel that defending oneself is a personal responsibility.

BTW, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional right of the individual to keep firearms today! That is a hopeful sign.

Patrioten
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 10:19 AM
Recently there was a story here about a man who witnessed two strangers stealing his neighbor's boat engine. He went after a shotgun and followed the thieves. It developed into a car chase where the thieves ended up in a ditch. They started running and the man went after them, aimed at the man and shot him in the back with his shotgun. Now he is being charged with attempted murder.

A while ago there was another story where a man shot and killed one teenager belonging to a gang which had harrassed his family for 3 years and who had phoned the house and told his mentally retarded son that they were coming over there to kill him. They were standing in the front yard with sticks in their hands and the father opened the door and started firing at them with a shotgun, killing one of them and wounding another. The man was cleared of all charges in court (as they deemed him to have had a temporary mental illness at the time), he was also given his guns back though he told the media he didn't want to hold a gun ever again. The gang of teens were charged with home invasion and were sentenced to youth service and surveillance I believe.

What are your thoughts on self defense? We use another legal term here, nödvärn, which translated means protection/force used in a situation of need, which broadens the scope a bit. How much force should a person be allowed to use to protect his family, property, life and or that of other? Are the laws in your country sufficient or would you like to see more rights being given to the citizen, or further restrictions on the use of force?

Psychonaut
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 10:32 AM
When it comes to a person's home, I approve wholeheartedly of lethal force being an option. The moment a criminal crosses the line and decides to invade another person's home, their life is forfeit. My home state, Florida, has excellent laws regarding home defense, but Hawaii most certainly does not.

The Horned God
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 11:43 AM
My attitude is this; In an ideal world If a burglar enters a house with the intention of only stealing cash and of fleeing immediately if he detects anyone in the house, then it is not reasonable that be shot dead if discovered by the homeowner, as that would be a retribution disproportionate to the severity of the intended crime.

However it is not an ideal world, and the homeowner cannot be expected to correctly divine the intentions of the intruder, decide upon a reasoned course of action and take that action while stopping short of using what may later be deemed to be excessive force, all in the few seconds available in an encounter that will feel to him like a life or death situation. Therefore if he takes the life of an intruder while thinking that his own life is in danger he must not be held accountable for that, even if it is shown later that his life was not in danger, because the intruder was not armed and had no history of violence, etc.

ChaosLord
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 11:34 PM
I believe in justifiable force, which means that you are allowed to defend yourself in any mean as to the degree of how you are threatened. If someone threatens to cause you bodily harm with their fists and feet; beat the crap out of them. If someone threatens to stab you with a blade; break their arm and hand. If someone threatens you with a gun; kill them. It comes down to how much your life is being threatened. It wouldn't make sense to kill someone for throwing a punch at you, but justifiable if someone pulled a gun on you and threatened to shoot you.

As in the case of the stories posted previously, I think both men were justified in what they did. If someone breaks into your very home and threatens your security, along with your family's then you should have the right to defend your home and belongings within a justified means.

BeornWulfWer
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 11:53 PM
If you enter someone's home with the intention of robbing or hurting the occupants, then I would feel no remorse to discover the criminal had died doing so.

Psychonaut
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 12:19 AM
However it is not an ideal world, and the homeowner cannot be expected to correctly divine the intentions of the intruder...

I think that this is the salient point when it comes to discussing home invasions. You can't exactly stop and ask, "Gee whiz Mr. Criminal, are you here just to take my TV or to rape and torture my family?" The only sensible option is to assume the worst and neutralize the invader in the quickest possible way, and I can't think of a quicker method of resolution than a shell of buckshot to the chest.

Ulf
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 01:48 AM
Shoot them in the leg, gut or shoulder. They'll live, get their day in court, and you'll hopefully get self-defense w/o attempted murder.

If you shoot them in the chest or head, your intent was to kill, not so much defend.

.357 or higher is usually an adequate enough wound to disable a robber/assailant, no matter where they're shot.

Psychonaut
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 02:01 AM
Shoot them in the leg, gut or shoulder. They'll live, get their day in court, and you'll hopefully get self-defense w/o attempted murder.


I don't know how good of a marksman you are, but when I do night-fire exercises, it's hard enough to hit center mass of a target, much less specifically aiming for a limb. Unless you live in a state like Hawaii where criminals have more rights than citizens, you're much safer just aiming center mass.

Ulf
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 02:15 AM
Well if you're unable to see or identify your target correctly enough I'm not too sure I would even discharge my firearm. I remember a story a while ago around here about a man who shot his daughter because she snuck out and came back into the house. The man thought she was upstairs asleep and that someone was breaking in.

Shooting blind? No thanks, I'll go for the lights, then my gun...

Psychonaut
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 03:02 AM
Well if you're unable to see or identify your target correctly enough I'm not too sure I would even discharge my firearm. I remember a story a while ago around here about a man who shot his daughter because she snuck out and came back into the house. The man thought she was upstairs asleep and that someone was breaking in.

Shooting blind? No thanks, I'll go for the lights, then my gun...

Well, I'd like to think that I'd be able to distinguish between a black guy (or in Hawaii's case a big Samoan guy) and my small children. As part of my job (US Army) I practice room clearing with paintball rounds regularly. I can tell you from personal experience, if your opponent is armed and sees you before you shoot, you're going to get hit. However, since it is a lot harder to his a target in absolute darkness, I always keep at least one light on down stars, just in case :D.

Ulf
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 03:21 AM
Well, I'd like to think that I'd be able to distinguish between a black guy (or in Hawaii's case a big Samoan guy) and my small children.
Hehe, same here, unless my children are ungodly large, in which case, my poor wife...


As part of my job (US Army) I practice room clearing with paintball rounds regularly. I can tell you from personal experience, if your opponent is armed and sees you before you shoot, you're going to get hit. However, since it is a lot harder to his a target in absolute darkness, I always keep at least one light on down stars, just in case :D.

In absolute darkness, niether of you would really have an advantage, aside from the fact that you (personally) have probably fired thousands more rounds of ammunition.

That said, I wouldn't fault anyone for killing an intruder, I feel that if given a slight advantage such as surprise, I would hopefully shoot to disable, not kill. If the intruder charged me, I would probably be to stressed to think ahead and would just outright shoot him anywhere.

I only say this because all to often good people get put in jail for killing in defense. It might save your ass down the road if you're put on trial to say, "Well, I just shot him in the leg, I didn't want to kill him." Obviously not always possible, but an ideal situation.

Psychonaut
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 03:53 AM
Ulf, perhaps your geography has a bit to do with your thinking. I checked the state by state break down of Castle Doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine#State-by-state_positions_on_Castle_Doctrine) in the US, and it turns out that your state is one of three in the entire country without any type of Castle Doctrine. I'm sure that my perspective has been affected by years of living in Florida and Alabama, where you're pretty much allowed to kill anyone who enters your home illegally. Apparently in Hawaii I'm supposed to make a retreat outside the home provided that it can be done in complete safety :rolleyes:.

Ulf
Thursday, August 21st, 2008, 04:00 AM
I think you might be right. My wife is inclined to agreed with you (we were just discussing this, plus she's from Michigan) but I would not want to be in the position of being jailed for defending myself. Hence my apprehension towards deadly force.

Leonhardt
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 04:55 AM
What are your thoughts on self defense? We use another legal term here, nödvärn, which translated means protection/force used in a situation of need, which broadens the scope a bit. How much force should a person be allowed to use to protect his family, property, life and or that of other? Are the laws in your country sufficient or would you like to see more rights being given to the citizen, or further restrictions on the use of force?
I agree with the US legal concepts of "stand your ground", and the "castle law". These concepts mean that you do not have to retreat from combat, and you can defend your home like it was a castle.
I think in some US states one can even defend their neighbor's home (possessions) with lethal force, and I agree with this. I wish this home defense legal protection was extended to dogs also.
People in all states should be able to carry a concealed hand gun for self defense. There are too many restrictions on knife carry also.
If it is reasonable to think that one's health is seriously threatened, then I think one is justified in using lethal force. They do not have to wait to be attacked.

For home defense buckshot and 45acp hollow points are good choices.

Ulf
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 05:00 AM
In PA there's no law on the books for open-carrying and the procedure for concealed carry is 'accept anyone unless proven otherwise'. There's no knife length laws on the books aside from things like switchblades. I've been carrying one of these (the top one) (http://www.jbrucevoyles.com/Auction%2036/cVoyles_Auction_36_078.jpg) since I want 15.

CrystalRose
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 06:01 AM
First off.. If an intruder enters my home it only proves one thing to to me: they have bad intentions. Whether it's rob, rape, etc. I'm grabbing the shotgun (any gun for that matter) in hopes they 'hear' the seriousness of the matter and that their life is in serious danger. Followed by my foot in their ***, hog tie them until the cops decide to show up an hour later. That's the risk they take being thieves. Part of the "job description" if you will. Them committing a crime sends all their so called rights out the wondow.
Rights? haha. What rights do you have? 'You have the right to remain silent', but this is going to hurt like a mofo. :D If they're lucky I might fire off a warning.
Part of me wouldn't want an intruder but the other part of me would love teaching someone a valuable lesson. ;)

Reminds me of a story, couple years back. A guy on the roof of some commercial property trying to break in.. ended up falling through the roof and sued! Do you believe that s***? I think he won too. Ridiculous.

Kriegersohn
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 12:24 PM
Reminds me of a story, couple years back. A guy on the roof of some commercial property trying to break in.. ended up falling through the roof and sued! Do you believe that s***? I think he won too. Ridiculous.

Was that in California? I know they have all sorts of stupid things like that going on. I remember when I was out there a few years back a guy defended himself during an armed assault and wounded the would-be attacker. The criminal sued him for the injury (which if memory serves, the criminal won)...not to mention that I think the guy wound up with some jail time and a fine for defending himself *because* he injured his attacker. What do they expect when we're attacked? Harsh language?

Mrs. Lyfing
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 02:00 PM
I know if someone comes into my home, my husband is going to go Kung Fu on his a**! He has the ability to do that. :D Thank goodness. We don't own any guns. However, I would like a little pistol. Shotguns make me nervous, to big, to powerful. ( but hell yeah ) ;) Got a couple hammers, knives, chainsaws:D, around though...

I think if anyone feels their life is seriously being threatened they have every right to defend themselves. People should really just say the hell with it, carry a little pistol, and say I ain't gonna take it no more. Therefore more times when some scum bag comes to hurt you or steel from you and the next victim and the next, less scum will *uck with us. Because we are the ones to watch out for now! ;) Pay back Motha *ucka :D

Patrioten
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 03:51 PM
I watched this American tv-show a long time ago about crimes caught on tape. These two guys entered a store and held the owner at gun point, the owner pulled a gun on them and shot one of the robbers dead while the other one fled. The robbers had fired a few rounds at the store owner as he brought out his own gun, but they missed. The robber that got away was charged with murder of the second robber and was also convicted for it. An interesting take on the issue of responsibility in a self defense situation.

I think the verdict made sense. The two robbers instigated, created the situation by entering the store with the intent to rob and possibly kill the owner. The owner responded by defending himself and his store in the manner which he deemed necessary, having every right to do so. One of the robbers was killed and someone needs to be held accountable. The surviving robber should therefor assume full responsibility for the events that followed (after the wheels had been set in motion by him and his partner in crime). It's a good prejudice, ensuring that the burden of guilt is placed wholly on the criminal and not on the victim.

Kriegersohn
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 07:59 PM
I watched this American tv-show a long time ago about crimes caught on tape. These two guys entered a store and held the owner at gun point, the owner pulled a gun on them and shot one of the robbers dead while the other one fled. The robbers had fired a few rounds at the store owner as he brought out his own gun, but they missed. The robber that got away was charged with murder of the second robber and was also convicted for it. An interesting take on the issue of responsibility in a self defense situation.

I think the verdict made sense. The two robbers instigated, created the situation by entering the store with the intent to rob and possibly kill the owner. The owner responded by defending himself and his store in the manner which he deemed necessary, having every right to do so. One of the robbers was killed and someone needs to be held accountable. The surviving robber should therefor assume full responsibility for the events that followed (after the wheels had been set in motion by him and his partner in crime). It's a good prejudice, ensuring that the burden of guilt is placed wholly on the criminal and not on the victim.


I don't disagree with that at all. Each state though has its own laws, Colorado for instance has its "Make my day" law which does allow for lethal force to be used. It has been stretched a little as well, one individual did spend about two weeks in jail for defending his neighbor's wife and property, he shot the two (paralyzing one) that broke into his neighbor's home after they had left and were about a block away or so. Charges were dropped against the individual and set free while the criminals had to go to court after they recovered.

GroeneWolf
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 08:23 PM
What do they expect when we're attacked? Harsh language?

Our former minister of justice advised peoeple when they saw people being atacked to scream look a green polar bear.

DanseMacabre
Saturday, August 23rd, 2008, 09:24 PM
Everybody has a right to self defense and they shouldn't be afraid to defend themselves or others from criminals. People are too pacifist and cowardly these days. In my city there was a women beaten to death by her boyfriend infront of the whole neighborhood and her children. By the time the cops got there she was dead. Nobody wanted to risk their own safety to confront this man.

I believe for home protection a shotgun is the best option. You needn't be a skilled marksmen, you merely have to aim in the right general direction. Which is perfect for a night intruder. In my state we also have concealed carry laws which permit us to carry concealed firearms. I would suggest learning hand-to-hand combat techniques as well.

CrystalRose
Sunday, August 24th, 2008, 03:29 AM
Was that in California? I know they have all sorts of stupid things like that going on. I remember when I was out there a few years back a guy defended himself during an armed assault and wounded the would-be attacker. The criminal sued him for the injury (which if memory serves, the criminal won)...not to mention that I think the guy wound up with some jail time and a fine for defending himself *because* he injured his attacker. What do they expect when we're attacked? Harsh language?


Yeah, I can picture that going smooth. "Hey intruder, stop right there or I’ll.... I’ll..(meanwhile you're shot) stand here and do nothing!" In the end it's either the intruder or me. And I don't know about you all but I enjoy life. :)

To answer your question; yes I believe it was in California.

I've heard of some counties requiring it's residents to carry/own guns.. which results in less crime.
Think about it.. you know everyone's packin a gun.. you're going to think twice about committing a crime against them, right? a big :highfive: To those folks.

White Africa
Monday, October 5th, 2009, 05:54 AM
Both are bad, but I think it's worse to go picking fights with people who never did anything to you, or especially for having a different opinion. I don't pick fights with people, so I expect them to do the same.

Resist
Monday, October 5th, 2009, 08:16 AM
Avoiding to fight to defend yourself is worse. I'd rather be mistaken for a thug than for a coward.

Bärin
Monday, October 5th, 2009, 08:23 AM
Everybody has a right to self defense and they shouldn't be afraid to defend themselves or others from criminals. People are too pacifist and cowardly these days. In my city there was a women beaten to death by her boyfriend infront of the whole neighborhood and her children. By the time the cops got there she was dead. Nobody wanted to risk their own safety to confront this man.
Exactly. It enrages me when Germans get attacked by aliens and other people around act like they don't see it, nobody wants to give their ethnic brethren a hand. But Slavs and Muslims stick together. How pathetic is that? I'm not an advocator of unnecessary violence, but to not do something to save yourself and your folk is pure treason. :thumbdown

Ossi
Monday, October 5th, 2009, 08:30 AM
IF you can solve a conflict or intimidate and get rid of your opponent by other means than fighting, fine. But chickening out like a coward is WORSE. It will turn you into an easy target for those who want to mess with you. Sooner or later you will HAVE to kick someone's ass if they keep messing around, to teach them and the potential others a deserved lesson.

White Africa
Monday, October 5th, 2009, 08:41 AM
IF you can solve a conflict or intimidate and get rid of your opponent by other means than fighting, fine. But chickening out like a coward is WORSE. It will turn you into an easy target for those who want to mess with you. Sooner or later you will HAVE to kick someone's ass if they keep messing around, to teach them and the potential others a deserved lesson.
If you get the reputation of a person who picks fights a lot, you'll also be beaten. I just prefer to stay away from violence as much as possible, unless I have no choice.

Bärin
Tuesday, October 6th, 2009, 05:24 AM
If you get the reputation of a person who picks fights a lot, you'll also be beaten. I just prefer to stay away from violence as much as possible, unless I have no choice.
Then you better make sure if you fight, you win the fight and get some asses kicked. If your opponents know others lost against you badly, they'll look the other way when you walk around.

By the way, I say "you" in general. Women should have a strong man by the side to protect them and fight for them.

Astrid Runa
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 12:06 PM
Self defence is a slippery slope here in the UK.
If you are faced with someone who bears the intent to kill you, and they attempt to kill you, you're faced with two options.
Let them succeed and kill you, or fight back and kill them and face a manslaughter charge.

The way this country is going, it seems that we're just expected to lay down and take it, let it happen. We're not allowed to carry any form of weapon (including pepper spray and except umbrellas), and if we're caught with any sort of form of weapon, we're charged with the intent to harm and carrying an offensive weapon.

If someone attacks someone else with the intent to kill them, and the attacker ends up dead by accident, the person who killed them is branded for the rest of their life and is charged with manslaughter.

If a woman finds herself in a situation where she is being forced to have intercourse against her will, and she fights back and seriously injures her attacker, or kills him in the act of self defence, then she is told that it was her own fault, that she asked for it, and she is charged and thrown in jail.

Now, I was trained in the art of self defence, and I mean proper self defence. Not that ninny rubbish they teach you to show off at gradings and tournaments. Proper defence that could save your life should you ever find yourself in a situation where you may lose your life.
I've never had to use it thankfully, nor do I wish to use it because what I know could really harm or kill someone. That's not something I want to do, but will if I have to.

I strongly believe in self defence, and do not agree with the way people who defend themselves are treated.
But to go back on topic, I believe that not fighting when necessary is equally as bad as fighting when it's unecessary.

Astrid Runa
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 12:09 PM
Then you better make sure if you fight, you win the fight and get some asses kicked. If your opponents know others lost against you badly, they'll look the other way when you walk around.

By the way, I say "you" in general. Women should have a strong man by the side to protect them and fight for them.

I don't agree with the bolded statement.
Women are perfectly capable of fighting and kicking ass.
We're not weaklings. I could fight a man and win just as easily as another man could.

Reshki
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:13 PM
Self defence is a slippery slope here in the UK.
If you are faced with someone who bears the intent to kill you, and they attempt to kill you, you're faced with two options.
Let them succeed and kill you, or fight back and kill them and face a manslaughter charge.

The way this country is going, it seems that we're just expected to lay down and take it, let it happen. We're not allowed to carry any form of weapon (including pepper spray and except umbrellas), and if we're caught with any sort of form of weapon, we're charged with the intent to harm and carrying an offensive weapon.

If someone attacks someone else with the intent to kill them, and the attacker ends up dead by accident, the person who killed them is branded for the rest of their life and is charged with manslaughter.

If a woman finds herself in a situation where she is being forced to have intercourse against her will, and she fights back and seriously injures her attacker, or kills him in the act of self defence, then she is told that it was her own fault, that she asked for it, and she is charged and thrown in jail.

Now, I was trained in the art of self defence, and I mean proper self defence. Not that ninny rubbish they teach you to show off at gradings and tournaments. Proper defence that could save your life should you ever find yourself in a situation where you may lose your life.
I've never had to use it thankfully, nor do I wish to use it because what I know could really harm or kill someone. That's not something I want to do, but will if I have to.

I strongly believe in self defence, and do not agree with the way people who defend themselves are treated.
But to go back on topic, I believe that not fighting when necessary is equally as bad as fighting when it's unecessary.

It's absolutely shameful that Scotland has fallen to such depths. Seriously, it used to be a nation of warriors, and they've allowed themselves (I guess yourselves) into being duped into being lambs. Sorry.

We have a technique for what we call NPE (non permissive environments -- where weapons are disallowed) called the triple-S maneuver -- Shoot, Shovel, Shut up. I guess where you are, it'd be more of a "leave the bad guy splattered across the pavement, so even his mother wouldn't recognize him, and leave the scene".


I don't agree with the bolded statement.
Women are perfectly capable of fighting and kicking ass.
We're not weaklings. I could fight a man and win just as easily as another man could.

There comes a point in strength and weight of your opponent where that is no longer true.

Astrid Runa
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:30 PM
It's absolutely shameful that Scotland has fallen to such depths. Seriously, it used to be a nation of warriors, and they've allowed themselves (I guess yourselves) into being duped into being lambs. Sorry.

How d'ya think I feel? I live here and I'm ashamed to be a part of this country. England holds way too much influence over us.


We have a technique for what we call NPE (non permissive environments -- where weapons are disallowed) called the triple-S maneuver -- Shoot, Shovel, Shut up. I guess where you are, it'd be more of a "leave the bad guy splattered across the pavement, so even his mother wouldn't recognize him, and leave the scene".

Hehehe, well, yeah. Depends on how much you annoy us, lol. xD




There comes a point in strength and weight of your opponent where that is no longer true.

There is such a thing as agility, y'know. I prosper in agility. I'm quite fast and light on my feet and can easily dodge things. I also know how to get someone off of me when they have me pinned down and are straddling me.
Agility helps a lot when you lack strength.

Sigurd
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:46 PM
I don't agree with the bolded statement.
Women are perfectly capable of fighting and kicking ass.
We're not weaklings. I could fight a man and win just as easily as another man could.

Women can put up a good fight for sure, but it's a man's place to be around for those he cares for. Most of the times it is a fact that the man is taller and stronger, in many cases this is about preventing a fight from happening in the first place, potential assailants will think twice before attacking a girl accompanied by a man that is quite a presence. :)


It's absolutely shameful that Scotland has fallen to such depths. Seriously, it used to be a nation of warriors, and they've allowed themselves (I guess yourselves) into being duped into being lambs. Sorry.

What would you expect? It's the country you can get fined for revving your car in a racist manner, and the country I was charged ₤40 for smoking in a bus shelter by a grumpy policeman. :P

Astrid Runa
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:56 PM
Women can put up a good fight for sure, but it's a man's place to be around for those he cares for. Most of the times it is a fact that the man is taller and stronger, in many cases this is about preventing a fight from happening in the first place, potential assailants will think twice before attacking a girl accompanied by a man that is quite a presence. :)



What would you expect? It's the country you can get fined for revving your car in a racist manner, and the country I was charged ₤40 for smoking in a bus shelter by a grumpy policeman. :P

Sigurd. I'd kick your butt and you know it xD
And I'm taller than the majority of men I know.
Though, you're right about assailants thinking twice about attacking a woman if she's in the presence of a man. Buuuut, if a woman has some sort of weapon, like an umbrella, she's less likely to be attacked, because she can use the umbrella to fend the assailant off.

Ulfvaldr
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:01 PM
The problem in most society's today, is defending your self can get you in to big trouble. if you have any kind of training on record, you can be arrested, no matter how lightly you handle the situation. My old Gru, almost got arrested because one of his older students killed a man, and it was with a gun, no Martial arts of any kind. They tried to say, "He taught him how to kill"

Thorwolf
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:35 PM
I prsonaly beleive it is beneath me to engage in violence that is unnessesary!
that being said, I personaly feel that it is a discrace, and an act of shame to my forefathers to not fight when it is nessesary!


After reading many of these posts, I am glad that I live in Texas. We have the right to use deadly force to protect our lives, our homes, and our property!

Sigurd
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 04:05 PM
Sigurd. I'd kick your butt and you know it xD
And I'm taller than the majority of men I know.

You could certainly try, but I doubt you'd manage. In physical confrontations with women, I'm always the gentleman and use the least amount of force necessary, retaliating by harsher means is nothing that a man wins honour from anyhow. As such, you'd very quickly find a physical fight with me either futile or frustrating fairly soon. ;)


Though, you're right about assailants thinking twice about attacking a woman if she's in the presence of a man.

Exactly. The moment in which a potential assailant decides whether the juice is worth the squeeze is not one where particularly many philosophical questions are asked. Two people are already a cause for hesitation, if one of them is a man of some presence they won't risk it and will seek an easier victim.

It's the moment when "psychological warfare" is most important, and that's where it helps to be a man of some stature. It doesn't matter whether you think yourself that you'd stand a chance, if they believe it then they won't attack. I was once followed by three men who acted suspicious enough for me to believe that they were intending to mug me. I slowed down and let them come closer, this acted as a deterrent.

This is something a woman can't do on her own, the fact that nine out of ten cases, men are stronger and this is what is in the attacker's mind as well. I have a friend who really shouldn't be messed with, she could take on Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee at the same time and win, has the stature for it as well, is in the security business. But, since she's a woman, it's always her they try to have a go at, and not her work colleague even though he is well shorter and well less robust than her and certainly looks less trouble.


Buuuut, if a woman has some sort of weapon, like an umbrella, she's less likely to be attacked, because she can use the umbrella to fend the assailant off.

Nine out of ten cases, assailants don't walk up to you and say: "Hi, I'm Robert. May I mug you?" --- So an umbrella will be useless. It takes too long to operate and needs the attacker to be at a certain distance and angle, you'd have to be a Yoga student of twenty years to stab an attacker that comes from behind.

The only thing that will help thus is something that is operable instantly, and at short range and odd angles, and which has the "surprise effect". Pepper spray will help for that, but it's only an aid, not a permanent solution. A man at the woman's side that gives the sign of "Don't even think about it" settles things well more smoothly. Often, moving your army to the border is all it takes, to use an analogy. :)

Reshki
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 06:20 PM
How d'ya think I feel? I live here and I'm ashamed to be a part of this country. England holds way too much influence over us.

Don't be afraid of being a Scot, but you should have utter disdain for the leaders who let the English disarm them AGAIN.



There is such a thing as agility, y'know. I prosper in agility. I'm quite fast and light on my feet and can easily dodge things. I also know how to get someone off of me when they have me pinned down and are straddling me.
Agility helps a lot when you lack strength.

Look, I'm not trying to discourage you at all. I'm really glad you have the attitude you do, and you seem to at least have gotten some training, which will get you out of a lot of things most women would succumb to. But realize that agility only gets you so far, and you DO end up at a point that it won't help you against a stronger, heavier opponent -- many of whom are also quite agile. You also seem to be depending on having a large training discrepancy between you and them in your favor. I don't know what the thugs are like over there, but thinking your average street 'groid over here is untrained is becoming more the exception than the rule. If you meet one, I'd suggest you use your agility to run, not fight.

But then things are different here, I always insisted my women learn to fight with knives, and when possible, guns to even things out. You don't really have that option.

Edgard
Saturday, September 17th, 2011, 09:08 PM
hPSiqNqDE40&

ansuz crowning
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011, 02:06 AM
Awesome