Ron Tisdale wrote:
I don't know about this...every time I practice Daito ryu, I have the same result as in aikido. Everyone goes home. In fact, I've seen way more injuries in aikido. Now admittedly, I don't train in Daito ryu regularly. But still...I think some of that Deadly Art (TM) stuff is ... well ... somewhat mis-placed. Sure, in Daito ryu you will see "todome" (killing strikes [even though I've never seen anyone killed by them]), but even some styles of aikido have those (yoshinkan, for one).
Yes, I do not buy into the theory that one art is essentially more or less 'deadly' than the other. Actually, I know of two aikido practitioners (both of whom I taught) who are no longer with us. One died as a result of shiho-nage; the other took his own life, for reasons he did not specify beforehand.
O Sensei stated in his rules for training that aikido techniques were not to be shown to people who might misuse them. If aikido has its ethical credentials right up front and on the sleeve, so to speak, I would think that this injunction would not be necessary.
Another way of thinking would be that aikido as practised in the US does indeed contain an ethical code; as practised in Japan it does not and this perhaps has to do with the values implicit in the respective cultures.
Of course, yet another way of thinking would be to argue that the techniques themslves constitute an ethical statement, rather as some people think that aikido is essentially 'peaceful' because aikido is a budo and the kanji for BU means 'stopping spears'.