The dissensus personal defence armoury

IdleRich

IdleRich
Some people do just like fighting I guess - Friday night you get tanked up, have a kebab and hopefully a fight or a fuck. I remember two friends walking home from somewhere and being challenged by another couple of lads with "You wanna fight?" but when they replied in the negative they just said "Fair enough, we're just looking for someone who is up for it".
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
absolute madness in this thread, i will stick to the music forum from now on, though i feel like someone's about to ask me "have you changed your mind?" with a billhook
It's crazy isn't it? Seems like Version has arguably the largest collection of lethal weapons of various kinds (which is particularly scary cos you imagine him thinking "Hmmm, shall I finish him off with the cleaver or the chainsaw?" - it's gone way beyond self-defence obviously). I'm definitely gonna be watching how I respond to him in future. You might say you can get away with it cos it's on the internet, you live in different countries and he's got no idea what you look like, but to me this clearly reveals that he is the vindictive kind of psycho who actually might track you down - one day I'll be drunkenly walking home and a sinister figure will appear in the alley leading into Rua Sao Francisco Xavier wielding a battleaxe and say "So what is you think about Paul Thomas Andersen again?".
 
Last edited:

vimothy

yurp
when I was little my sister used to go to ballet lessons in ashton and in same building was this amazing shop full of samurai swords and crossbows and catapults and big fucking knives. me and my brother used to tag along just so we could sit in the shop for an hour or so and drool over all the weapons
 

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
when I was little my sister used to go to ballet lessons in ashton and in same building was this amazing shop full of samurai swords and crossbows and catapults and big fucking knives. me and my brother used to tag along just so we could sit in the shop for an hour or so and drool over all the weapons

Everyone always said you were the sortt to have a numchucka collection
 

version

Who loves ya, baby?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
It's crazy isn't it? Seems like Version has arguably the largest collection of lethal weapons of various kinds (which is particularly scary cos you imagine him thinking "Hmmm, shall I finish him off with the cleaver or the chainsaw?" - it's gone way beyond self-defence obviously). I'm definitely gonna be watching how I respond to him in future. You might say you can get away with it cos it's on the internet, you live in different countries and he's got no idea what you look like, but to me this clearly reveals that he is the vindictive kind of psycho who actually might track you down - one day I'll be drunkenly walking home and a sinister figure will appear in the alley wielding a battleaxe and say "So what is you think about Paul Thomas Andersen again?".
And now he's put a sinister laugh emoji on my comment. I'm hearing it like Richard Widmark

 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
That's very sensible, Rich. Martial arts is this weird thing, 'cos if you're into it for self-defence, you are training for something you never want to use. The exact inverse of most hobbies and pastimes. And the fact that most people *don't* use it means you never know how useless it is. It's quite hard and horrible to fight for real, and most people aren't going to go and train to prepare for that on a Tuesday evening after work. Why would you? Weapons just seem to make the consequences higher.
Having done a few odds and ends of martial arts over the years, something I find interesting is that while learning martial arts for self-defense is mostly a terrible idea in terms of cost / benefit - like, realistically the basic cardio-vascular fitness is far more likely to save your life than the ability to fuck someone's shit up in single combat - and I've always understood that I'm basically training for the fun of it, one condition of it seeming worthwhile, even on those terms, is that it does basically "work" to the extent that it claims. So I wouldn't mind doing some form of traditional Uzbek wrestling that assumes that you'll start off in a clinch gripping the back of your opponent's belt and trying to throw them, but I would feel somehow cheated if you never got to test whether this or that throw would actually work against someone who was really trying to stop you within the rules of the sport.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Don't you mean "not within the rules of the sport"? Or am I misunderstanding?
Isn't Uzbek wrestling the one where they're all oiled up and slippery? If it's the one I'm thinking of it seems unlikely that those conditions will occur on a Friday night in Croydon.
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
Within whatever context it's alleged to work, I guess. I think on some level the question could be whether the body mechanics fundamentally work?

We saw a bunch of different Central Asian wrestling styles at a thing in Kyrgyzstan - there were definitely a few that were heavily based on holds on the belt and not much else, but I can't remember which was which.
 

vimothy

yurp
ppl talk about how theres two types of martial arts tho - there's fake ones like kung fu and proper ones like bjj or boxing. I think if you do a proper one where you regularly fight in semi-real situations, you're definitely going to beat any "normal" person in a straight fight
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Within whatever context it's alleged to work, I guess. I think on some level the question could be whether the body mechanics fundamentally work?

We saw a bunch of different Central Asian wrestling styles at a thing in Kyrgyzstan - there were definitely a few that were heavily based on holds on the belt and not much else, but I can't remember which was which.
Ah, I thought that you meant could they go beyond that very specific context. Bur surely if they are the holds made for that sport then they must work in that sport? If the sport's moves don't work in the sport and no-one was able to actually affect the other person it would be a pretty dull spectacle wouldn't it? Unless - which is I suppose is possible - it's a sport which is built upon a handicap of deliberately useless moves which are so ineffective only an absolute master can actually use to cause any harm at all to an opponent. So Uzbek wresting would be kinda like one of those games you see at fairgrounds where you have to play table-tennis looking only in a mirror or whatever? But that would make it quite unlike most other types of fighting sport which I believe tend to originate as either a) an advanced way of fighting which gives its practitioners an advantage or b) a codification of rules to make it fairer and more honourable with fewer injuries (like for example boxing).
Or are you questioning whether your teacher was truly teaching an authentic version of the moves?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
ppl talk about how theres two types of martial arts tho - there's fake ones like kung fu and proper ones like bjj or boxing. I think if you do a proper one where you regularly fight in semi-real situations, you're definitely going to beat any "normal" person in a straight fight
I feel as though I hit (no pun intended) on something in my comment above though. Maybe it's obvious but I've never really thought about it before, but now I am thinking that there are two types of martial-art, or two philosophies or something.
1. Thinks like Krav Maga which is developed to make someone better at fighting. It introduces moves you might not have thought of and teaches you how to hone them to win actual real rights.
2. Things such as boxing which is in a sense the opposite, where they restrict the moves you can do and introduce extra rules, so the idea for someone doing it is to become better at boxing, not better at fighting. I'd argue the whole point of it is to create a kind of pseudo-fight with rules so that people can fight on the same terms, and with the same restrictions and so you can be judged fairly on fighting within those rules. The idea behind it could almost be to replace fighting with a sanitised version of it so that ultimately fewer people are hurt. Like maybe you have an argument in a bar but instead of going at it then and there and glassing each other or whatever, you can arrange to meet a few days later in a ring with a ref and rules, and honour will be satisfied and the best man will win (as much as any contest really decides who is the best man).
I'm not disagreeing with you in the sense that someone who is good at boxing will get better at punching and better at dodging punches (particularly those of the kinds that are thrown in boxing) - but I don't think that a person who dedicates their time to boxing will improve at random no-rule streetfighting, as much as they would have done if they had chosen to follow krav maga or some of the other ones which are just straight up fighting (I don't know enough about martial-arts to say which come in this category though).
Does that make sense? I just made it up but it seems right.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Obviously it's not so black and white as that as I guess all of them restrict what you can do to a greater or lesser extent - but I think that it's not unreasonable to split into the categories of a) Fighting that can just about be called a sport and b) A sport that looks like fighting. I'm not belittling either by the way, just saying they have different aims.
 

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
I reckon boxing would be pretty good cos if you crack someone in the head they fall over then you can stamp on their head some more till they die.
 

vimothy

yurp
I dont think restriction vs expansion of moves is critical thing - it's whether you have to have realistic fights regularly. theres like a genre of YT vids of pp challenging martial arts experts to MMA style fights and there's a whole category of styles that just go nowhere
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
So for an example, I did Shodokan Aikido for a while at uni. Aikido in general has two features - it doesn't have a competitive element because philosophically it's all about peace and harmony, and it's mostly comprised of fiddly arm and wrist locks and balance-based throws that are really hard to get to work on a non-compliant opponent. And in practice that means that you never know that your beautiful armlock technique would actually work, even on a mechanical level, on someone who really cared about stopping it. Shodokan, in constrast, says that well, maybe a certain amount of competition can actually help you to learn more about peace and harmony or something, so let's do a slightly artificial but fully competitive sparring thing involving a foam knife. And now you still aren't learning street-lethal brawling because arm and wrist locks are still basically impractical and the opponent still isn't allowed to just nut you or whatever, but you have at least had to genuinely test the mechanics of what you're doing against both the gym-bunny newbie who just pushes back with brute force and the experienced person who knows how to twist out if you don't put it on accurately enough, and that feels somehow more honest in a way that I care about.
 
Top