|
|
By Bradley J. Steiner, American Combato
Self-defense bears not the slightest relation to competition or sport of any kind—regardless of popular present mythology—no matter how “tough,” “rugged,” “demanding,” or supposedly “devoid of rules” any sport or competitive venue may be.
People who fail to understand this will simply pay for their error one day when the reality of violence confronts them. Or they will simply remain the dupes of con artists and commercializers, and continue to enrich the coffers of these entrepreneurs for years to come, believing nonsense and training in irrelevant contest material while believing they are preparing for close combat and self-defense emergencies.
The idea that arises when we view self-defense emergencies objectively is that the dirtiest, foulest, most destructive, ruthless, and ferociously vicious attitude, coupled with warlike skills is everybody’s solution to felonious criminal violence when and if it ever intrudes into their lives.
The idea of introducing “compassion,” “mercy,” “forbearance,” “ethical consideration,” “humanity,” “decency,” ad nauseum into a training program intended to save innocent life from criminal predation is insulting, stupid, and (except for what we would hope is only a small minority of braindead) repugnant.
Compassion, mercy, forbearance, ethical consideration, humanity, decency, etc. is exactly what violent offenders toss out when they gleefully ply their despicable trade of predation!
By what twisted, moronic, asinine, shameful process of botched “thinking” do members of the human species accept the politically-motivated BULLSHIT that enjoins them to remain on a peace-footing when dangerous predators who have given up their right to live, move on them in a war-footing—often murdering, maiming, raping, terrifying, impoverishing, kidnapping, humiliating, and in general destroying them (or trying to do so)?
If you sense outrage here, we are on the same page.
While the current wave of propaganda would have you recoiling at the mere thought of weapons—especially guns!—it is important for you and all decent human beings to remember that weapons, including guns, are TOOLS.
Tools enable a person to better accomplish, to accomplish more efficiently, and in some cases simply to accomplish in the first place, some necessary tasks. With the knowledge of how to do it, you can build a lean-to in the wilderness and create temporary emergency shelter with nothing but your bare hands. But if you want to build a house you will need tools. Hell, with a good knife you can build a better lean-to!
Weapons enhance your ability to defend yourself. They are tools designed for the purpose of increasing your ability to handle interpersonal confrontations. And while many so-called “martial arts teachers” and students eschew modern weapons and believe—stupidly—that they must, as “great warriors” (?) deny themselves anything but their unarmed abilities, supplemented by a stick, or some antiquated bullshit weapon.
A sword might be OK . . . but a handgun or a shotgun or a fighting knife, oh, my no, no, no!
Jackasses.
We listened to one example of self-induced retardation exclaim, when we told him that we teach firearms, knifework, how to employ a walking stick, tomahawk, and objects-at-hand—all in self-defense—“Yeah, man, but that’s not true martial arts.” Oh, no? The fact is that nothing is a truer form of modern martial art than a modern school of unarmed combat and its accompanying modern array of weapons.
No, we didn’t say this to the retard; why argue with a window dummy? But it is important for you who are a seeker-after-reliable-and-practical instruction and training to appreciate the truth of what we say.
“But Brad,” you might object, “if I use a weapon—a gun—on an attacker who is unarmed, I am going to prison!” Not necessarily. You need to check into the law where you live to determine (and there ARE circumstances) when the law would allow a victim of violent attack to use a firearm against an unarmed assailant.
However, as far as a firearm is concerned, it is wise to tread carefully. Necessarily, the use of what is clear, and obviously deadly force is strictly regulated everywhere. And it should be. But there are weapons other than firearms that are readily available (at least in the United States) and that we would use without hesitation if we believed that our safety and well-being was being threatened by an attacker, even if all he was using were his bare hands. Walking sticks head the list, with folding, legal-size lock blade knives a close runner-up.
The advantages of a walking stick that you know how to use as a weapon are really amazing. Proficiency permits you to inflict severe injury without killing—and injury that produces pain beyond belief!
Owning and carrying a walking stick is, as far as we know, legal virtually everywhere. The weapon is always in your hand. This makes it faster into action than a holstered gun under your coat, and faster than a knife that you must produce and open. The walking stick gives you reach, power, and the ability to use force up to and including deadly levels, should that become necessary (vs. a gang attack; a much younger, larger, stronger attacker; or knife-wielder, etc.).
Another excellent weapon from WWII is the Spring Cosh. To date we are aware of no one who manufactures a worthwhile example, so—until someone produces an exact reproduction of the old SOE/OSS weapon, we urge that you simply keep an eye out for it. The versions we have seen are junk.
A Yawar hand stick is excellent; but you need to be well-versed in its use and possess a fair degree of strength to employ it well.
There are really two points requiring attention when it comes to the use of weapons vs. an unarmed attacker: 1. Morality, and 2. Legality.
Morally, we have no problem using any weapon to stop any attacker.
But we would not act on this belief, and we certainly would never teach anyone that such was a desirable guide to action. It is not. Legally, we must be aware that strict laws regulate our ownership and use of weapons, and so we urge ONLY the lawful use of any and every weapon you might consider.
But we do see something dreadfully wrong with anyone who finds the idea of using a weapon against any assailant, armed or not, somehow “wrong”, if an emergency arises.
For self-defense you must have the right attitude. And that attitude is one of wrath and hatred toward violent offenders. They are bad people (more akin to wild animals than to humans, actually) and morally it is appropriate to see them as toxic bacteria, deserving of nothing but destruction.
If you are one of our students, then you already have heard us repeatedly advocating that combination of mindset and skills set that you need to deal with the dregs of human society who choose violence and predation as their way of life.
Factor in what we’re saying here. If you are serious about self-defense and protecting those you love, then stop thinking of martial arts as unarmed contests, and start thinking of martial art as PREPARATION FOR WAR.