PDA

View Full Version : What a great plan.


BigDaddy
September 9, 2008, 02:44 PM
I have to share this:

My sister in law (lives in L.A.)who is a rabid liberal, antigunner, earthy crunchy, you name it she has a better opinion on it. Ok, she recently visited for my daughter's birthday and of course, the topic of guns came up. Her new plan is to begin taking martial arts classes so if attacked by a gun toting hoodlum, she can immediately disarm him and shoot him with his gun.

What a great plan!

--Dave

NAKing
September 9, 2008, 02:50 PM
I took a self defense class (H2H) once. We practiced disarming guys with knives for part of the class. I asked about disarming assailants with handguns and he told me you're pretty much dead if you are unarmed and the attacker is bent on assaulting you unless he's given you a very unusually strong position. I'll keep toting a handgun, thank you very much.

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 02:52 PM
Is she an olympic level athlete? Is she 6' 8" tall and weight 200 pounds?
Is she as swift as a Gazelle? Can she jump tall buildings in one bound?
Is she faster than a speeding bullet? Is she at least faster than a slow bullet?

:confused:

Oh well. Live and learn, right? Or maybe not live, ...

:confused:

Keltyke
September 9, 2008, 03:02 PM
I'll take her on. I'll use my gun, she can use her new-found martial arts skills. We'll see who's left standing.

Never bring a fist to a gun fight.

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 03:13 PM
Never bring a fist to a gun fight.


The focus of women's self defense without a gun should be to hit the bad
guy really hard in the general region that you don't normally discuss at
cocktail parties and RUN

Anything else is just silly.

I don't care how much martial arts a lady takes. She's still a girl.

BigDaddy
September 9, 2008, 03:30 PM
I told her that Bruce Lee himself would have likely been shot between the headlights in such a situation. But you just can't tell somepeople anything. The bad part is she has kids and is poisoning them with her crap.

;)

--Dave

BigO01
September 9, 2008, 03:33 PM
You should inform her Bruce Lee's son died from a gunshot and it was only loaded with blanks .

How does she think she'll do against real bullets ?

R1145
September 9, 2008, 03:41 PM
...She's at least acknowledging the need for self-defense. Once she develops a warrior mindset, she might come to the tactical decision to be armed.

Years ago, a young lady I knew told me about the martial arts training she had begun. Without meaning to cause offense, I told her many of the things expressed in this thread, which are, of course, true.

I realize now that she had fragile self-esteem (like many of the posters here, it seems sometimes), and I should have been more supportive.

I think you should encourage her. Once she starts to evaluate her risk, she might change some of her opinions.

Saab, while I agree that as a general rule, women are physically weaker than men, I have known women who have subdued and arrested men bigger than them, without shooting them, and they were still just girls, as you say.

Saying that a woman's only unarmed force option is to kick a guy in the nuts and run is pretty poor advice. Training is valuable, and usually the most important factor in determining the outcome of a fight.

What about the recent case in Texas where the woman fought against her attacker, and, with her husband, ended up killing one and wounding the other. I bet if she had had even a little training, she could have done it herself. She was fighting for her family's lives.

Keltyke, are you suggesting you'd shoot an unarmed woman...? Of course not, you're making a point, but any fight has many variables. Having a firearm is a tremendous advantage, but not insurmountable.

NavyLT
September 9, 2008, 03:42 PM
I received Modern Army Combative training (hand-to-hand) prior to deploying Iraq. The very first statement they made in the class was, "No matter what, the winner of the fight will be the FIRST person to bring a gun to it."

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 03:51 PM
Saying that a woman's only unarmed force option is to kick a guy in the nuts and run is pretty poor advice.


Advising a 90 pound woman to get into a fist fight with a 200 pound man
would likely make you partly responsible for her getting severely injured
or for her going to the great dojo in the sky.

BigDaddy
September 9, 2008, 03:55 PM
Well, I'll admit she is no weakling. She is in good shape. However, she lives in this bubble where she ignores the harsh reality of where she lives. For instance,a couple of years ago we visited for thanksgiving. This was her plan for a family thanksgiving in Los Angeles -- to drive over to East L.A. and find some homeless people and drive them to the Salvation Army for a nice thanksgiving meal. Of course that didn't happen.
--Dave.

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 03:58 PM
Well, I'll admit she is no weakling. She is in good shape. However, she lives ni this bubble where she ignores the harsh reality of where she lives. For instance,a couple of years ago we visited for thanksgiving. This was her plan for a family thanksgiving in Los Angeles -- to drive over to East L.A. and find some homeless people and drive them to the Salvation Army for a nice thanksgiving meal. Of course that didn't happen.
--Dave.


Can you tactfully suggest that she spend the money she budgeted for
martial arts on professional help?

Keltyke
September 9, 2008, 04:12 PM
The focus of women's self defense without a gun should be to hit the bad guy really hard in the general region that you don't normally discuss at cocktail parties and RUN
Provided he lets her get that close. If she doesn't totally disable him, she's in deep kim-chee.

I don't care how much martial arts a lady takes. She's still a girl.

Gender doesn't enter into it. "Armed or not armed" does.

andrewskaggs
September 9, 2008, 04:33 PM
I'm a fan of both martial arts training and CCW.

Is martial arts training a replacement for having a concealed weapon? No.

Can martial arts help me avoid the NEED to use deadly force when facing someone with (for instance) a baseball bat, tire iron, etc? It may.

Plus, martial arts are fun!

lockedcj7
September 9, 2008, 04:34 PM
I stopped dating a girl once because she had a yellow belt and was convinced that she was a bad-a$$. We were accosted by a couple of thugs on the street one night. The situation didn't look that dangerous and it looked like we could fast-talk our way out of it. Instead of getting off easy, she started antagonizing them and we damn near had to fight. I had to carry her bodily to the car.

Martial Arts may be good for developing self confidence, vigilance and situational awareness but I've also seen it contribute to a dangerous level of bravado and over confidence.

Glenn E. Meyer
September 9, 2008, 04:37 PM
Lots of posturing - having anyone take a modern combatives course is a good thing, tough guys. If you haven't taken one - you really don't know what you are talking about.

Some of you aren't contributing much to the discussion.

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 04:43 PM
Lots of posturing - having anyone take a modern combatives course is a good thing, tough guys. If you haven't taken one - you really don't know what you are talking about.


I've had my fair share of martial arts training, but there is no martial
arts that will let me prevail over a mountain gorilla. Same for a woman
who thinks she can prevail over a man.

TATER
September 9, 2008, 04:48 PM
lockedcj7
That is called a character flaw.. I have seen a firearm produce the same results..;)..And a badge for that matter:)

Glenn E. Meyer
September 9, 2008, 04:51 PM
So Saab - in your expert opinion - martial arts or combative training categorically is a waste of time for a woman as they cannot beat any man?

Perhaps, you can't prevail over a mountain gorilla - that is a wonderful bit of scientific evidence to prove your point.

So women should not learn escapes or strikes or anything H2H given your expertise?

:barf:

Black_Ops
September 9, 2008, 05:01 PM
Sounds like she's coming around to pro gun, she'll just be using someone elses. It's a start...................:D

Flyboy_451
September 9, 2008, 05:22 PM
She would be better off with pepper spray, soft body armor and a good pair of running shoes...Spray, hope any rounds fired either miss or impact on the body armor, and run like her life depends on it...BECAUSE IT WILL!!!

Justin

lockedcj7
September 9, 2008, 05:29 PM
Glenn, not everything we say is going to be profound. I've had my share of H2H combat training and I agree that it was valuable. I also know that some people let it go to their head. At least my instructor was wise enough to make sure that I had a reasonable level of humility to go along with any skills I may have learned.

The OP's sister will certainly be better off with training than not but it's folly to plan to take a gun away from an armed assailant. In all the training I got, that was considered a very high-risk, last resort.

At least the training will be useful for unarmed combat and she might even start considering a less-than-lethal defensive weapon.

Vanya
September 9, 2008, 05:31 PM
Lots of posturing - having anyone take a modern combatives course is a good thing, tough guys.

Glenn is right about this one... how can it possibly be a bad thing for any woman to get self-defense training?? If she's learning from a good instructor, one of the first things she'll likely find out is what the limits of her strength are, relative to that of most men. And she'll also be exposed to people who do have more of a clue than she currently does about ways she can arm herself... pepper spray comes to mind here as a place she might be willing to start.

Sensible people of whatever gender don't go around picking fights. The fact that most men are stronger than most women means that if she's assaulted, any woman with decent training is better off than one without.

"Prevailing over a man" isn't the goal here. The goal is to defend yourself and get out of danger -- I think it's fairly well documented that a woman who resists a physical assault (by a rapist, for instance) is likely to come out of the situation better than one who doesn't...

Saab1911
September 9, 2008, 05:45 PM
So Saab - in your expert opinion - martial arts or combative training categorically is a waste of time for a woman as they cannot beat any man?

Perhaps, you can't prevail over a mountain gorilla - that is a wonderful bit of scientific evidence to prove your point.

So women should not learn escapes or strikes or anything H2H given your expertise?


No. I already stated that the best option is to hit the bad guy where it
hurts and run.

I guess if you play enough Mortal Kombat, you may start to think that a
petite woman can kick the @@@@ out of a 200 pound man

Finish Him!!!

But reality is that the best option, if unarmed, is to hit where it hurts and run.

A better option is to be armed and know how to use the weapon.

By the way, if you keep telling women they can stand toe to toe with a man
and kick his buttocks, you'll eventually get a woman killed.

David Armstrong
September 9, 2008, 05:59 PM
Her new plan is to begin taking martial arts classes so if attacked by a gun toting hoodlum, she can immediately disarm him and shoot him with his gun.
Rather than being derisive, we should recognize that she has made a huge step forward. She is acknowledging that she has some responsibility for her own safety and security, and cannot count on others to protect her. It's a good beginning. Now perhaps she should be encouraged, such as "Do you know there are a lot of different gun designs out there. Why don't you come with me to the range and I'll show you how the different guns work so if you disarm him you'll be able to safely operate the gun." And then maybe something along the lines of "Now that you see how easy it is to use a gun, do you really think that going up against one with yhour martial arts is a good idea? Why don't we expand your protection plan by getting trained in firearms and buying one for yourself." Remember the old saw, from tiny acorns mighty oak trees grow.

By the way, if you keep telling women they can stand toe to toe with a man
and kick his buttocks, you'll eventually get a woman killed.
That is highly dependent on the woman and the man. I've known a fair number of women that could hold their own against lots of men, and I've known lots of men that wouldn't stand a chance against a woman with even llimited training.

BigDaddy
September 9, 2008, 06:06 PM
Sounds like she's coming around to pro gun, she'll just be using someone elses. It's a start...................

LOL! that's what I was thinking when she said that.

--Dave

Jermtheory
September 9, 2008, 07:06 PM
I'm a fan of both martial arts training and CCW.

Is martial arts training a replacement for having a concealed weapon? No.

Can martial arts help me avoid the NEED to use deadly force when facing someone with (for instance) a baseball bat, tire iron, etc? It may.


This is the problem with martial arts...people start to think things like "it trumps a bat".

Good luck with that.

Im all for H2H training,but it should be a last resort(after run and/or gun) against an armed attacker...or in the case of much bigger/stronger assailants(as with most woman-v-man scenarios).

I dont know of any martial arts that can give you the ability to smash bone and kill with an almost casual wave of the hand(despite what many practitioners may tell you).Even if they did...so its now an even fight with the guy waving a tire iron?:rolleyes:


Just FYI-i trained in multiple disciplines for the better part of a decade.as always "its better to have and not need...",but i wouldnt bring my fists to a knife fight,any sooner than a knife to a gunfight.

Capt Charlie
September 9, 2008, 11:07 PM
Martial arts are all about technique, not brute strength or size. An expert martial artist (of more than one style ;)) can disarm and take down an opponent considerably larger than him (or her) self. The gentle art of Judo, for example, teaches the student to use an opponent's strength and size against him. Against a gun? It depends on the element of surprise and how good the opponent is.

None the less, that doesn't seem to be the main focus here. What the main focus is, however, is more demeaning to women than not.

And that's the reason I'm closing this.

Restart this if you like (and in general, it's a good subject for debate), but let's leave the sexist remarks out of it, shall we?