Gun Training As Another Form of Martial Arts? (Martial artists respond.)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is there a distinction between martial arts and handguns?

Historically, combative martial arts have always been a product of those who absorb, adapt, and apply. Didn't matter if it involved the latest weapons technology has to offer or simple farming tools. It was always about what it took to fight, survive, and win.

Granted, the contemporary definition of "martial arts" may be the preservation of past traditions. But I don't see it that way. To me, the handgun is yet another tool in that ever-evolving tactical landscape, but the purpose and concept has never changed.

I think the only real confusion here is in naming conventions.
 
Jedi/Darth,

Thanks for your measured replies. I will be happy to reply in detail later- in fact, if you would like, please contact me directly at SlickWillie@trust-me.com . Let me also say that having a sense of humor must surely be one of the most important attributes of the well-rounded gun owner. :)

Thunder Ranch just happens to be one of the best known firearms-training institutions in the US. I was merely using it to express those willing to actually train, as opposed to lazy people who think firearms are totems. I have, unfortunately, encountered quite a few of these armchair warriors.


John
 
Why is there a distinction between martial arts and handguns?

1. "Martial arts" is an approach to skill and discipline. A handgun is a tool.

2. Martial arts pay attention to art and philosophy of the combat technique studied. All too often these are forgotten in firearms training.
 
Darthmaum,
I don't know of any skilled martial artists who go around trying to get into fights so they can "whoop up" on somebody, or any that would "want" to get into a hand-to-hand fight with anybody. I would believe that anyone who does that is psychotic. There's a real danger of starting fights with strangers - one of the fundamental things I've learned is that you can never judge a book by it's cover. For example, my TaeKwonDo instructor is one of the few American masters recognized by the Korea TaeKwonDo Association, was quite successful in tournaments in the late 60's/early 70's, and has been in several real fights - including fights with armed and multiple opponents (he's a retired LEO). But he's very quiet, in his 50's, wears glasses, and looks all the world like Andy Griffith from his Mayberry days (we used to get a huge kick out of it when he showed up for class wearing his Sheriff's Dept. uniform). Despite all that, I know that at the peak of my skills, he could destroy me on his worst day. Remember, you don't know what you've gotten yourself into until it's too late to get out....

As far as advice goes, I'll steer clear of recommending any specific style or class. Look around, see what's available. I recommend you pick an instructor/class that you:
1) Like/are comfortable around
2) that's been around awhile (school's not likely to close up - this happens a lot)
3) Think you could stick with a while (learning a few techniques won't do you any good if you don't practice)
Lastly, study something you think you'll enjoy! Doing something you dislike is work, doing something you enjoy is play. If you don't truly enjoy it, you won't stick with it, and you won't be motivated to train.

Oh yeah - don't be fooled into thinking that the guy with the biggest ad, or the one with the fancy school, the most trophies, or the most students is automatically the best around - it's not necessarily true, or necessarily untrue, either. You have to look past all that. Remember, it's what they teach and how they teach it that matters, not where.
 
To clarify,

My wife wasn't referring to anyone, man or woman, deliberately going around looking to 'whoop' anyone- she merely wanted to know if anyone knew of any woman skilled enough in her chosen art that she could defend herself against an armed, 6'2" 250 lb, attacker, w/o herself being in possession of a gun- the point being, as has been said before, sole reliance on any one method or tool for defense menas you're training/strategy is incomplete.

------------------
Lady Justice has been raped, truth assassin;
Rolls of red tape seal your lips, now you're done in;
Their money tips her scales again, make your deal;
Just what is truth? I cannot tell, cannot feel.

The ultimate in vanity
Exploiting their supremacy
I can't believe the things you say
I can't believe, I can't believe the price we pay- nothing can save us
Justice is lost, Justice is raped, Justice is gone
Pulling your strings,Justice is done...
Seeking no truth, winning is all,
Find it so grim, so true, so real....

If it isna Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!
 
A Jedi & a Lady of the Sith...a strange combination indeed. ;)

Sorry, I misinterpreted the question.

Yes, I have encountered some females that could handle your average 6'2" 250 lb man, unarmed - and even a few that have. There are a lot of factors that go into fighting - some are measurable, some are less tangible. Size, strength, endurance, speed, and skill are all measurable quantities. Things like determination, desperation, a willingness to do whatever it takes to win/survive are not so measureable or predictable.

A finger buried in someones eye socket hurts just the same, whether it's delivered by a 250+ lb. linebacker or a 90 lb. woman.
 
Darth,

Actually, I do know two women who could hold their own against any opponent, at least as well as any of the men I have met. Both trained in koryu bujutsu, old Japanese battlefield arts. One was Rumiko Hayes, Steve's wife (I thought she was the more skilled of the two, by far). I weigh well under 150, and I know I outweighed her. Great person, dangerous as hell. The other lady, when I met her 5 yrs ago, was a knockout redhead- who did executive protection for low-profile (by choice) rich types in NYC. I also remember seeing a tiny woman knock out 12 or 15 pullups with perfect control on Paris Island 6 years ago. I wouldn't have wanted to cross her (not that any Marine would be my first choice to antagonize :-))!

I think it is important for all of us to do what we reasonably can. I do not believe my years of hand-to-hand training are "reasonable" for most people, and would not suggest following the path I have chosen for those who need self-defense skills in a minimum of time. I would suggest getting some reasonable training and staying in good shape- for families, there are activities that will let one get or stay fit while simultaneously bonding closer to each other.

Bottom line: it makes sense for those of us who are truly concerned with being able to defend ourselves, families, and beliefs to be well-rounded with our capabilities, without too great a dependence on any one tool or skill. A reasonable fitness level is a good baseline for this.
 
Oh- quick addendum:

If any of you are ever forced into a hand-to-hand struggle, use every weapon at your disposal. I'm not saying, look at the ketchup packs every time you do through the drive-through, and think of how you could squirt them in the BG's eye, but think of what tools make themselves available, at least occasionally. It will be easier to do this if you can make it fun at the same time. How far, for example, can you open/toss a packetfull of sugar? Can you reliably peg a baseball (or even tennis ball) through a small hanging tire? How high can you jump? How far can you jump? How long can you jump rope? There are lots of fun skills that will enhance your ability to protect you and yours. Don't limit yourselves to how Hollywood says "real fighters" fight.

Enjoy. :D
 
The many different replies on this topic show just how well rounded this little community is. Some have stressed consistant training with 1 firearm to intimately implant its controls and limitations in your mind. Others have stressed physical fitness,others blending HTH arts with shooting arts, etc. All are worthy of consideration and hold merit. What the good doctor Rob said is the most important aspect of all, imho. The MIND is the most dangerous weapon we possess. Some in the shooting community call it "mindset". If we are truely to call ourselves "warriors", then we must always be in the right frame of mind. Firstly, warriors should always pray/hope for peace, for it is us who die in war. I think this is why most matial arts teach restraint until restraint is no longer an option. Second, we must realize what it truely means to be a warrior. Warriors do battle. And in the course of doing battle, the chances of lives being lost, be it theirs or their opponents, is great. If a person is not prepared to go into battle to take a life, or give up their own, they should not follow the way of the warrior. Those that have been mentioned by others here : the ones that carry a gun to wound an assailant, or scare one off, should find a more peaceable way of life. Another thought on mindset: In my short life of 33yrs, I've be lucky enough to have been a practitioner of Shudokan Karate-Do, Kinjuitsu, dabbled in TKD, trained rigorously in the use of firearms, been a soldier, and traveled around the world plying my "trade". I am also an artist, love to read, try my best at poetry and caligraphy. By no means have I ever been a "master" of any of those things, but I am still breathing, so I must have done something right. The learning should never end. I've seen "masters" who could present an incredibly complicated, intricate kata so perfectly that you were afraid to breathe in case you spoiled the moment, but they couldnt fight their way out of a wet paper bag. They didnt have the warrior mindset. I also know people with bad knees, women with children, and folks not at their optimum body weight that can be the fiercest of warriors. Why? Because of their mindset. The original topic of this thread was about handguns and the martial arts.Should shooting handguns be defined as a martial art? It should be considered an aspect of training for the warrior. Just my opinions.

------------------
"To die as a warrior means to have crossed swords and either won or lost without any consideration for winning or loosing. There is just not enough time and generally not enough strength in the resolve of any man to do otherwise"-Miyamoto Musashi
 
Yes! Thank you.

And, to second what someone else said in this thread, don't think that, just because anyone is famous, they can fight. Also, just because someone can fight, does not guarantee they can teach. Look not only at the instructor, but as his students.
 
We seem to have to different main topics in this thread - the first, what are the martial arts or "way of the warrior" and second, what about the average Joe who has a gun for self defense?

First, as I've stated before, a warrior - a martial artist - if he is serious, should train with firearms, in my opinion.

Second, very few are called or suited to be warriors - most of us are something else, such as merchants, craftsmen, parents - everyone is called to a different life's work, I believe. The GREAT thing about fireams is that it gives non-warriors, non-martial artists, the ability to fight on an almost equal footing. Compare the requirements of fencing to the requirements of shooting - shooting is A LOT EASIER. And size and strength play much LESS of a role. Just because someone is not a warrior doesn't mean they don't have the right to defend themselves - and with firearms, teit ability to do so effectively increases. :)

My 2 cents
 
Alex,

I agree 100% that one should take every advantage when defending one's life, or the lives of others. This means using a tool, and firearms are of course the most effective distance weapons available today. I do believe that some form of hand-to-hand training will give increased options and may buy distance to the lawful gunowner. Failing even a dedicated martial art (this includes wrestling, boxing, and fencing, in addition to the ones that come to many people's minds) everyone can make some effort to maintain their mobility and strength.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top