View Single Post
Old 03-31-2003, 03:24 AM   #11
happysod
Dojo: Kiburn, London, UK
Location: London
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 899
United Kingdom
Offline
Aargh, this one again! Is there a lawyer in the house? If so, could they please give us their learned opinion on whether a court of law would ever accept that any martial art was inherently non-violent?

Intent may mitigate the results your actions, but does not defend your actions. You've all chosen to learn a martial art which involves learning a systematic way of damaging another human being (your motives for learning it are entirely your own). If you're very skilled, you can choose the limit of damage (right down to mere avoidance and destablising). However, your intent is still to defend yourself through a physical reaction. A truely non-violent response would be to accept the drubbing and "turn the other cheek". Go-on, be a devil and accept there's a little violence in you, you're just being sensible and channelling it in a useful manner....
  Reply With Quote