Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2012, 02:03 PM   #26
Garth
Location: NYC
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 92
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

i would submit that reasoning with a crazy man or trying to figure out why he has attacked only serves to dull the senses.
In a untrained individual you get a flight or fight response , in a trained individual you get a response hopefully educated.
Such reasoning is not tolerated by grizzly bears or on the plains of the Sarenghetti
or are the participants capable.(same with truly crazy people) We have removed ourselves further from these realities. And good people wind up dead or maimed because of it all the time.
It is allegedly a civilized society.
Jim was not the one who allowed a mentally ill probably addicted person to roam the streets and terrorize people in an alleged civilized society.
If this thread turns out to be about the value of Aikido training as opposed to "fighting",
I would propose a quote from Ellis Amdur's book, "There is no tenkan without irimi" (not sure if the first or second book) How you choose to irimi again is up to you the attackee,(training anyone?) But you can spend your whole life tenkanning (avoidance, getting out of the way)
when all you really needed was a irimi.
Figuring out societies ills as to why? is a much too complicated matter and better left to the academics. Once you are attacked and as to what to do with that attack would be a much better discussion. for this website.

A day will dawn when you will yourself laugh at your effort. That which is on the day of laughter is also now.
Ramana Maharishi
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:41 PM   #27
jackie adams
Location: CA
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 73
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Greetings Aikido community, hope all it well and training is enjoyed. I can't help see a similarity with the Travon Martin and Zimmerman case (TMZC). No one panic, I am not going to turn this into one of those verses them and us online debates over the particulars of that incident. The Stand Your Ground Law (SYGL) how it played out for Zimmerman has some similarities. If Jim could have use more than necessary force, if possible, before the attack he may not been exposed to life-threatening disease or even injured. Can we assume Jim was not trained to defense himself adequately because he was injured. Therefore, his understanding of what level of force needed adequately is outside of Jim's control. Jim like Zimmerman may have used too much, or in Jim's case not enough because of his sustained injuries. He wasn't able to adequately protect himself. Aikido training as self-defense training. As powerful as boxing is a fighting sport, it isn't a method of self defense on the street. It could be if the paradigm is modified for self-defense.

Once the homeless guy kicked the bike, Jim could of used the number one rule in self-defense, stay away of the homeless man getting close, keeping a distance/ma-ai between him and the attacker. Jim could have ran as the homeless guy closed in on him to attack him. But instead, Jim didn't, and contact was made that got Jim his injuries and possible deadly diseases. Aikido in my view has a great technique that is crucial in all martial arts, but it Aikido can be used outside the realm of fighting, to not fight. Ma-ai in the Aikido sense to avoid violence is that technique. One that would have worked better for Jim.

*Jim being well aware of the homeless man and on guard is something coupled with ma-ai in my comment.

Last edited by jackie adams : 05-02-2012 at 07:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 07:24 AM   #28
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
If Jim could have use more than necessary force,
Legally, that's excessive force. Morally or practically speaking why would you use more than 'necessary' force? Although technically impossible to judge when within a given situation, I can't think why anyone would correctly evaluate the level of force needed and then go "You know what, forget it." and apply more. If there's a situation you can sort out with a slap, there's no need to pull a knife and get stabbing.

Quote:
Can we assume Jim was not trained to defense himself adequately because he was injured.
No. Getting injured is a by-product of fighting regardless of how well you are trained. Doesn't matter who you are, there is always a chance you will be injured. Moreoever, the injuries in this case were from Jim punching the attacker in the mouth.

Quote:
He wasn't able to adequately protect himself.
But he was. He did exactly that. His injuries were caused by him doing it. The result may have been the same if he had applied an aikido technique, e.g. sumi otoshi'ing the guy to the ground and getting covered in his blood/pinning him with sankyo and the guy biting his leg, etc.

Jim went well beyond what's required before defending himself, attempting to escape and suffering several strikes before hitting back. I wouldn't have been anywhere near as nice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 07:48 AM   #29
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

I honestly don't think issues of minimum/excessive force matters in this incident. How is a single punch "excessive"? Especially when thrown in an act of self-defense amid an assailant's attack? If anything, the resulting injuries were an uncommon and unfortunate result of what was essentially a run-of-the-mill street fight.

As far as I know, the guy who got attacked is not even a martial artist. So we can't rightfully criticize his combat techniques. This does bring up an interesting topic though, which is protecting yourself while destroying your enemy. I recall the story of the assassin who was killed by a bullet fragment ricochet that entered his eye and brain. Sure, he shot and killed his enemy too, but he died in the same hail of gunfire--from his own hand nonetheless!

The lesson to be learned is that we have to always ensure our own safety first, then look to lash out at our enemy second. Sometimes this is difficult to do, especially in the heat of an unpredictable moment.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:30 AM   #30
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
I honestly don't think issues of minimum/excessive force matters in this incident.
They matter wherever the law applies.

Quote:
How is a single punch "excessive"?
No-one said it was.

Quote:
I recall the story of the assassin who was killed by a bullet fragment ricochet that entered his eye and brain.
Who was that?

Quote:
but he died in the same hail of gunfire--from his own hand nonetheless!
How does one bullet become a 'hail of gunfire'?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:56 AM   #31
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Geoff Byers wrote: View Post
They matter wherever the law applies.

No-one said it was.

Who was that?

How does one bullet become a 'hail of gunfire'?
I want to say the assassin's name was David Beron or something to that effect. He was involved with the Mexican drug cartels. There were multiple shooters using assault rifles and shotguns.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 09:13 AM   #32
jackie adams
Location: CA
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 73
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Geoff Byers wrote: View Post
Legally, that's excessive force. Morally or practically speaking why would you use more than 'necessary' force? Although technically impossible to judge when within a given situation, I can't think why anyone would correctly evaluate the level of force needed and then go "You know what, forget it." and apply more. If there's a situation you can sort out with a slap, there's no need to pull a knife and get stabbing.

No. Getting injured is a by-product of fighting regardless of how well you are trained. Doesn't matter who you are, there is always a chance you will be injured. Moreoever, the injuries in this case were from Jim punching the attacker in the mouth.

But he was. He did exactly that. His injuries were caused by him doing it. The result may have been the same if he had applied an aikido technique, e.g. sumi otoshi'ing the guy to the ground and getting covered in his blood/pinning him with sankyo and the guy biting his leg, etc.

Jim went well beyond what's required before defending himself, attempting to escape and suffering several strikes before hitting back. I wouldn't have been anywhere near as nice.
Geoff Byers, and everyone else Hello. I hope everyone is well this fine day. Geoff Byers thank you for responding to my comments.

Homeless people can be a dangerous threat, indicated clearly by Jim's encounter of being attacked. Homeless people's capacity of fighting skills are limited, they are not to the level of a skilled martial artist or fighter. But their fighting skill are tailored their environment and living conditions. Desperate and mentally ill people are very dangerous because they can be unpredictable, irrational and violent. A very dangerous cocktail.

In many states in the US, Jim could have used deadly force under the stand your ground law. JIm under the law could have used deadly force because he was physically threatened when his bike was kicked by the homeless man. Here in California, that isn't the case. California law says basically if you can't use more force than then what threatens you. In many cases, here, criminal are able to sue their victims for using more than required force. Law abiding citizens who are victimized under life or death situations, who used deadly force to save their lives have been arrested tried for murdering the armed assailant threatening to kill them. It isn't all that uncommon for the innocent victim to be convicted. California has strict gun laws, unlike Florida that allows citizens to carrying a concealed weapon and used against any situation a person feels their life is threatened.

Jim being in So.California, I am not surprised he wasn't arrested, the homeless man went in a coma- Jim still could be arrested and tried for murder. Jim being a trained boxer works against him when punching on a homeless man who just kicked his bike. Jim was using more force than the situation required, the homeless man only kicked the bike.

If Jim, was aware of the homeless man coming at him he could dropped the bike or got on the bike and insure to keep a out of the homeless man's range of contact. It can be argued homeless man are not in good shape. Jim who rode his bike to work is in better shape. Jim could have out run the homeless guy, even when his bike was kick. Even when the homeless guy was taking swings which I can assume blows that didn't not land on Jim. Jim didn't have to excessively punch the homeless guy so hard it sent him to the asphalt, both the punching and hitting the ground caused serious internal injury and unconsciousness. In California, Jim didn't adequately use proper means of protecting himself. He was lucky he wasn't arrested and the D.A. file charges there and then. The D.A. may still, especially if the homeless man dies. The only saving grace I see is the camera footage where Jim was being chased that immediately keep him out of jail.

It isn't always easy to be able to gauge the appropriate amount of force to use when under an attack. If Jim was adequately trained in self-defense he would have better avoided the situation. Jim would have not reacted as he did with so much force due to the adrenaline dump (he probably hand learn to control). Jim if he was well trained in self defense many have handle the adrenaline dump and stress of the situation better. He would have better understood homeless people are dangerous, knowing there is a high risk contacting a deadly disease. Knowing homeless people can be mentally unstable and volatile. They live under dangerous street conditions that are desperate and volatile. Self defense isn't proving what kind of sick fighter you are, it demands awareness and avoidance. It is imperative too, the law of the land is understood. Street self defense situations don't result in someone going home with a trophy. There are consequences for violence.

Jim returned violence with excessive violence. He may have avoided some blows, and defeated his attacker. What he wasn't able to avoid was a possible death sentence of being infected with a deadly disease, and the possibility he will be prosecuted by the law. He may have won the fight, but he lost to the consequences of fighting. He didn't go home a hero or feeling good about himself.

Overal, it is a bad and unfortunate situation.

Thank you everyone for the opportunity to comment on his subject. Have a great day.

*excessively punching or more forceful punch =a stronger or more damaging punch than the initial punch landed. Jim hitting harder and doing and causing more physical damage than the punches received by the homeless guy. I don't think Jim was punched at all, or received physical injury from punches he received. He did damage his hand from the blows he used on the homeless guy.

Last edited by jackie adams : 05-03-2012 at 09:23 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 09:38 AM   #33
jackie adams
Location: CA
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 73
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

May I add, that there are many cases on the books in California where people who are fighting in self-defense where one person gets hit being knocked to the ground suffering severe injuries or dies from hitting the ground results in the hitter being arrested going to jail. It doesn't matter if the person who was left standing was a victim or not.

We can't turn the world in to a utopian place where violence doesn't exist. We can manage violence better, keeping from exploding. We have to promote violence, we don't need to praise it. We don't have to allow or indulge the world to become a dystopian world where violence rules. Violence isn't any stronger than peace.

Everyone please be able to enjoy a peaceful and rewarding day.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 10:01 AM   #34
jackie adams
Location: CA
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 73
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Jackie Adams wrote: View Post
We have to promote violence, we don't need to praise it.

Everyone please be able to enjoy a peaceful and rewarding day.
I am having a Monday on a Thursday....sorry! I meant to say, we don't have to promote violence, we don't need to praise it.

Again my apologies.

Last edited by jackie adams : 05-03-2012 at 10:03 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 10:06 AM   #35
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Jim being a trained boxer
I don't think that was said anywhere. People guessed, but taking up the classic pugilistic stance is something people do even if they haven't been trained.

Quote:
It can be argued homeless man are not in good shape. Jim who rode his bike to work is in better shape. Jim could have out run the homeless guy, even when his bike was kick.
Three assumptions.

Quote:
Even when the homeless guy was taking swings which I can assume blows that didn't not land on Jim
Another assumption, when the first post says they did land. Three hits.

Quote:
*excessively punching or more forceful punch =a stronger or more damaging punch than the initial punch landed.
We have no way of knowing that. Jim took three, and replied with one. The fact that the attacker then keeled over is a tad unlucky, but you can train all you like and still end up accidentally killing someone when defending yourself, it makes no difference. For all we know, the attacker had an impending embolism and the punch set it off. Not Jim's fault, no way for him to tell, it's simply not forseeable for a layman.

The lesson I'm taking away from this is not "Ooooh, be really careful when defending yourself because you might hurt someone." It's "Don't attack people on the street at random because they might just turn around and level you."

Quote:
If Jim was adequately trained in self-defense he would have better avoided the situation.
'Adequate' training does not imbue one with magical powers. You can be a wonderfully talented martial artist, defending yourself in the most restrained way possible, and still end up causing far more damage than you intended. The vast majority of factors in a fight are not under your control.

Quote:
May I add, that there are many cases on the books in California where people who are fighting in self-defense where one person gets hit being knocked to the ground suffering severe injuries or dies from hitting the ground results in the hitter being arrested going to jail. It doesn't matter if the person who was left standing was a victim or not.
Please list said cases.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 10:09 AM   #36
Michael Hackett
Dojo: Kenshinkan Dojo (Aikido of North County) Vista, CA
Location: Oceanside, California
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,227
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

@ Roger: David Baron was killed during an ambush that he was leading. There was indeed a hail of gunfire with hundreds of rounds expended. He was shot in the eye and died at the scene. I don't think it was ever determined which of the many guns shot him, let alone if it was a bullet fragment from his own gun. He was a contract killer for one of the Mexican drug cartels and may have been killed by his intended victims and may have been a casualty of friendly fire.

@Jackie: Your understanding of self-defense laws, particularly in California, is incorrect. A person has a right to defend himself here, but cannot use more force than necessary. It is entirely situational and determined on a case-by-case basis. There are a number of facts used in the analysis; which party was the aggressor, relative size, strength, condition, what actually was done and in what manner. A single punch, even from a professional boxer would not be considered excessive force in a situation as described originally. If the facts were altered even slightly, that same punch could be considered deadly force and unlawful.

Stereotyping all homeless people into some group is equally inaccurate. Some are young and strong while some are old and feeble. Some are military veterans with significant martial skills, and some have no martial skills at all. Some are rational and sober, while others are mentally ill and addicted to drugs and alcohol.

Overall this was a tragic event for all concerned. Did Jim do anything wrong? Apparently not as he was not arrested or charged. Could he have done something different? Certainly. Should he have done something different? That would be easy for all of us to answer with the benefit of the hindsight we now have - a benefit Jim didn't have at the moment.

Michael
"Leave the gun. Bring the cannoli."
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 10:27 AM   #37
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

You're a ray of light, Mr Hackett.

/lie down and two aspirin o'clock
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 10:43 AM   #38
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

@Michael Hackett: If you are part of a team of assassins and one of your cohort's bullets kills you, then you might as well have died by your own hand. Not literally, obviously. It doesn't matter if the "friendly" bullet that killed you came from your own gun or your buddy's. You'll still be just as dead, and it's not your enemy's fault. The point I was making is that recklessness during an attack can lead to your undoing.

Also, I don't see the importance of dwelling on the legal aspects of this incident. Legalities are subjective. This was in So Cal and by what people are saying he could've/should've been arrested for what he did. But he wasn't. So much for our perceptions of legalities...
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 11:36 AM   #39
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Legalities are subjective.
Oh dear.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 11:45 AM   #40
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,157
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Geoff Byers wrote: View Post
Oh dear.
I'm guessing Roger meant to say that they're situational...?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 12:28 PM   #41
jackie adams
Location: CA
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 73
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Michael Hackett wrote: View Post
@ Roger: David Baron was killed during an ambush that he was leading. There was indeed a hail of gunfire with hundreds of rounds expended. He was shot in the eye and died at the scene. I don't think it was ever determined which of the many guns shot him, let alone if it was a bullet fragment from his own gun. He was a contract killer for one of the Mexican drug cartels and may have been killed by his intended victims and may have been a casualty of friendly fire.

@Jackie: Your understanding of self-defense laws, particularly in California, is incorrect. A person has a right to defend himself here, but cannot use more force than necessary. It is entirely situational and determined on a case-by-case basis. There are a number of facts used in the analysis; which party was the aggressor, relative size, strength, condition, what actually was done and in what manner. A single punch, even from a professional boxer would not be considered excessive force in a situation as described originally. If the facts were altered even slightly, that same punch could be considered deadly force and unlawful.

Stereotyping all homeless people into some group is equally inaccurate. Some are young and strong while some are old and feeble. Some are military veterans with significant martial skills, and some have no martial skills at all. Some are rational and sober, while others are mentally ill and addicted to drugs and alcohol.

Overall this was a tragic event for all concerned. Did Jim do anything wrong? Apparently not as he was not arrested or charged. Could he have done something different? Certainly. Should he have done something different? That would be easy for all of us to answer with the benefit of the hindsight we now have - a benefit Jim didn't have at the moment.
Michael Hacket thank you for your well versed comments. I side on a conservative view when it comes to the self defense law. I am not a lawyer, I am an average citizen. I don't want to be less conservative and have that challenged in a courtroom. Better safe than sorry.

Stereotyping is best used as a tool of self-defense. There isn't a consequence if you are wrong and the person being stereotyped doesn't attack you. If don't stereotype properly within the context of identifying a threat, stereotyping a threat as harmless that in fact isn't because it attacks you, then you suffer violent consequences. We then can say stereotyping in context of self defense is being on guard, alert to possible attacks. Being on guard reduces the risk of attacks. It is said, the Founder was always on guard. Whether or not this it was true, being on guard, not letting your guard down was a valued asset, and still is. Stereotyping isn't an accurate synonym that works in the context of respecting the capabilities of a homeless person living on the street who could be mentally unstable. Being on guard and not letting your guard down on the street lowers your risk of attack, especially surprise unprovoked attacks.

Thank you again, and have a good enjoyable rest of the day.

Last edited by jackie adams : 05-03-2012 at 12:32 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 12:37 PM   #42
Rob Watson
Location: CA
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 697
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Geoff Byers wrote: View Post
Please list said cases.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...ing-man-uptown

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...B44G.DTL&tsp=1

There are quite a few more ...

"In my opinion, the time of spreading aikido to the world is finished; now we have to focus on quality." Yamada Yoshimitsu

Ultracrepidarianism ... don't.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 01:25 PM   #43
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
I'm guessing Roger meant to say that they're situational...?
I meant subjective, as in: open to interpretation. But it's true that it is situational as well.

The legal consequences of any given action are at the sole discretion of the individual enforcing the law. That person is either usually a cop or a district attorney. They are bound by state and local laws, but its ultimately a matter of their own personal opinions and feelings on the matter as far as how they decide to proceed.

In the Trayvon Martin case, the DA "felt bad" and decided to do a 180 and change thier mind about letting a murderer go free a month later. Yet at the time of the murder, they were completely cool with it. While the laws may be very clear and set in stone (though they are often not), it's still a matter of interpreting what actually occured during a particular crime, and how to prosecute and punish the individuals involved.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 02:15 PM   #44
Garth
Location: NYC
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 92
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

"In many states in the US, Jim could have used deadly force under the stand your ground law. JIm under the law could have used deadly force because he was physically threatened when his bike was kicked by the homeless man. Here in California, that isn't the case. California law says basically if you can't use more force than then what threatens you. In many cases, here, criminal are able to sue their victims for using more than required force. Law abiding citizens who are victimized under life or death situations, who used deadly force to save their lives have been arrested tried for murdering the armed assailant threatening to kill them. It isn't all that uncommon for the innocent victim to be convicted. California has strict gun laws, unlike Florida that allows citizens to carrying a concealed weapon and used against any situation a person feels their life is threatened.

Jim being in So.California, I am not surprised he wasn't arrested, the homeless man went in a coma- Jim still could be arrested and tried for murder. Jim being a trained boxer works against him when punching on a homeless man who just kicked his bike. Jim was using more force than the situation require
d, the homeless man only kicked the bike. "

Thats why California maybe even more messed up then here(NYC)
I want to say that common sense prevails with the cops, sometimes , a lot of times not, because they are under pressure from an overzealous commander or prosecutor, or just not that brite , ALL trying to cover their asses.... Cameras everywhere now just seals the deal... if they want to keep their jobs or details.(cops)
Anybody remember Bernard Goetz, a lot of people say he was overzealous and a little crazy... I say he opened his mouth too much and from his talking a case was pieced together against him...irregardless of whether he had been pushed over the edge into never never land.
Violence of action is term used by special operators... it is not a promotion of indescriminate excessive violence. It is an embracing acknowledgement that there is a brief time when the violence(sometimes deemed excessive) is needed to turn the tide back in your favor(outnumbered, caught napping).
What did O'sensei say when he was older? "lo and I am already behind my enemy" (something to that effect), his understanding of conflicts had progressed obviously but I am pretty sure that the O'sensei of the 1935 Asahi news film would have had the attacker or several laying on the floor knocked out.
MVHO
G

A day will dawn when you will yourself laugh at your effort. That which is on the day of laughter is also now.
Ramana Maharishi
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 03:44 PM   #45
Anjisan
Dojo: Aikido of Madison
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 188
United_States
Offline
Ai symbol Re: The Consequences of Fighting

I would also be curious to know what role alcohol, other illicit substances as well as mental illness may have played in the behavior of the homeless man. Such a role would certainly call into question how much control he actually had over his choices.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 04:20 PM   #46
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Neither article says anything about them being in self-defense...? Would you like to try again?

Quote:
The legal consequences of any given action are at the sole discretion of the individual enforcing the law. That person is either usually a cop or a district attorney. They are bound by state and local laws, but its ultimately a matter of their own personal opinions and feelings on the matter as far as how they decide to proceed.
Er, no. A policeman cannot simply decide to not arrest you for murder if he comes across you knelt over a dead body with a knife in your hand, screaming "I've killed you and I loved it!" They have to enforce the law regardless of their own personal feelings on the matter.

Last edited by Belt_Up : 05-03-2012 at 04:24 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 04:40 PM   #47
Rob Watson
Location: CA
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 697
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Geoff Byers wrote: View Post
Neither article says anything about them being in self-defense...? Would you like to try again?
Hit and dead on the ground ... the rest is kind of hard to sort out. Self-defense is more a legal strategy as opposed to a statement of fact. Suffice it to say there a plenty of examples of a 'simple' hit resulting on someone ending up dead.

"In my opinion, the time of spreading aikido to the world is finished; now we have to focus on quality." Yamada Yoshimitsu

Ultracrepidarianism ... don't.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 07:17 PM   #48
Belt_Up
Dojo: Dynamic Aikido Nocquet
Location: Hartlepool
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Suffice it to say there a plenty of examples of a 'simple' hit resulting on someone ending up dead.
I never contested that. I made that exact point earlier. What I took issue with was:

Quote:
May I add, that there are many cases on the books in California where people who are fighting in self-defense where one person gets hit being knocked to the ground suffering severe injuries or dies from hitting the ground results in the hitter being arrested going to jail.
Quote:
Self-defense is more a legal strategy as opposed to a statement of fact.
I fail to see how two men killing one and then pleading no contest to voluntary manslaughter could have anything to do with this discussion. It was claimed that these cases were specifically self-defense.

Here's a hint. You most likely will not be able to find proof for such a claim in news sources. You will have to actually consult (gasp) case law.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:31 PM   #49
Garth
Location: NYC
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 92
United_States
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Er, no. A policeman cannot simply decide to not arrest you for murder if he comes across you knelt over a dead body with a knife in your hand, screaming "I've killed you and I loved it!" They have to enforce the law regardless of their own personal feelings on the matter.

Words mean something, this is not semantics. Murder the way you described it is not up to the policeman, (his job is arrest while trying not to mess up the alleged criminal's rights)it is the prosecutor who chooses from several different distinctions, among them
Murder in the 1st and 2nd degree
Manslaughter
Negligent homicide
and then maybe self defense again, if you don't run into the aforementioned
CYA cops
overzealous DA
politically correct or public opinion driven DA and or mayor.

"stand your ground " laws give cops exactly the leeway about arrest in States that are still "sane"
about personal liberty.
In the Trevon Martin case we have both "stand your ground" and "public opinion" working and it has brought to light transgressions (maybe excessive force and evidence of truths not being told as witnessed on both sides) so the system is working.
Several other cases in possibly states with no stand your ground laws have come to light since then and if you are not in the correct political class or on the right side of public opinion as reported by an allegedly "unbiased " media,or vindicated by a video, you wound up pretty much up the creek or dead.
So if you are home alone at 1am watching your one year old baby and some one starts to kick in your door and you shotgun them right thru the door, err... the cops do have discretion to say self defense
contrary tragically to what has now become popular non common sense belief

A day will dawn when you will yourself laugh at your effort. That which is on the day of laughter is also now.
Ramana Maharishi
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:14 PM   #50
Alberto_Italiano
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 296
Offline
Re: The Consequences of Fighting

Quote:
Michael Douglas wrote: View Post
Alberto your last line is interesting but I have to point out that 'devastating' would imply a consequence other than a broken or torn arm : non-aikidoka when "kotegaeshid" do not hit the ground with their heads. (You can all argue that point, you're welcome.)

What would Ueshiba have done?
Stotted him in the throat with the bike. No, really.
Well the problem with a kotegaeshi in a bar is given by the nearby forniture: the guy flies and lands not on the ground but on the corner of a table and that corner may cause an internal rupture of a vital organ, in an instant. Corners (notoriously absent in dojos lol) make unpredictable how a guy would impact.

Or he may end up on the surface of the table arguably on bottles or glass, which may sever arteries, or maybe he first lands on a table, then being still under the impetus of the throw bounces down the table carrying with himself flying spoon forks and knives... he gets up realizing he has a fork into his inner tight, or into his neck (I doubt he may risk a spoon in his butt... yet he may still risk a blade in his ribs or glass into his eyes!).

But the main problem with a kotegaeshi in a bar or in the street is that the guy will break his bones either on concrete or on wooden corners.
If he does not injure his skull, he may still get paralyzed by fracturing his vertebras. Falling on your backbone on concrete is not a nuisance: ever tried an ukemi on concrete? I did, intentionally, and I am not going to try twice I was afraid i could have ruptured one of my hips... which could have caused lifelong limping...

See how some falls on the mat are. Guys who hit squarely with their backbone on the floor, others who hit it and bounce -, I had once a guy under my very first kotegaeshi rolling away for several meters bouncing like a ball along the mat in a straight line - never seen something like that ever again, since then; we had the whole dojo holding "its" breath seeing this guy bouncing around indeed like a ball in a basketball game would do, plus with a lot of noise and intercepting other aikidokas too during his apparently endless "run". I was later admonished źdon't ever put muscular force in that!╗.

But in a real fight you will be tempted to put muscular force in it. Now imagine the guy bouncing at rush hour straight off the sidewalk...

If I have not misunderstood it, the unfortunate guy of this thread had not a problem because of a punch, but because he fell on concrete as a consequence of a punch and hit his head on concrete - he too was not supposed to do so.

So now imagine what may happen if a fall on concrete is determined by a guy falling not because of his poor balance when hit by a trivial punch (despite what we see in movies, falling after one punch is a rare occurrence, mostly induced by fear) but because a guy has deliberately thrown him knowing that the consequence would precisely be an accentuated impact on the ground... he may hit his vertebras and/or skull with tripled force... you don't see guys hitting their heads in dojos but that depends also on the fact that if they do, they may report no consequence because there is a mat. However in a street you have street lights, parked cars, bins, sidewalk corners... and even a minor skull hit on something as inelastic as concrete may cause severe concussion - you kotegaeshi thinking it was the right thing to do, you realize only when it's too late you were not aware of your sorroundings because you were focusing (and rightly so) on your most imminent challenge.

I love kotegaeshi, I may be tempted - however, think twice if you can. You may have to live with the consequences in a real situation.

Given the dramatic intelligence of this thread, and given the manifold implications (inclusive of the fact one has to live with the remorse he may have killed somebody, something that arguaby even if done in self-defense may be a memory you would have preferred to live without...), I would still suggest to use armlocks as your first choice against unarmed opponents: easier, safer, clean, and final. And hardly lethal.

Last edited by Alberto_Italiano : 05-04-2012 at 02:28 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fighting Mind vs Warrior Mind graham christian Training 109 03-12-2011 04:50 AM
Aikido - Martial Arts - Fighting George S. Ledyard External Aikido Blog Posts 54 09-18-2009 07:23 AM
Aikido is not about fighting Stephen Kotev General 99 03-16-2009 11:15 AM
Fighting shadow Training 82 12-22-2006 07:31 PM
What is the nature of modern fighting Don General 10 11-03-2004 04:27 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2017 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate