83 year old aikido black belt repels home invader.

The home invader, a muscular man in his thirties who may be linked to other burglaries, broke into the high-set home in Gilruth Rd, Kenmore at about 8.30pm.
Inside were Edwin Dowdy, 83, and his wife Jutta, 76, who have lived in the property in the quiet Kenmore street since 1966.
When the couple - who both have black belts in the Japanese art of Aikido - realised there was an intruder in the house Mr Dowdy grabbed a knife from the lounge room he had kept for security and went to confront the burglar and warn him he was armed.
He said he confronted the intruder and told him he had a knife, but the man tried to push past him and ran on to the blade.
The injured burglar - who was bleeding heavily from a knife wound to his stomach - took two of Mrs Dowdy's handbags and ran on to the balcony and jumped to the ground.
A large amount of blood was visible there this morning.
He then fled down with the Dowdys in pursuit and tried to steal a car from a few doors down.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/news/home-inv...#ixzz2AXUydoXk

Their names are perfect too for a story like this!

Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

Robert M Watson Jr wrote: Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

It's when they run into it several time it becomes annoying!

The detective stated, at least twice in that article, that only "reasonable" force is allowed and that they don't know that transpired in the house. In addition to that their "concern" for the burglar has definate overtones of wanting his/her side of the story to possibly arrest the homeowners.

Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault. The fact that the article mentions that both of the individuals have attained a blackbelt in Aikido and that the fella's own account of what happened really does set them up for serious liability.

Robert M Watson Jr wrote: Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

Lyle Laizure wrote: Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault. The fact that the article mentions that both of the individuals have attained a blackbelt in Aikido and that the fella's own account of what happened really does set them up for serious liability.

The news article is Australian but I expect they have similar laws there.

Lyle Laizure wrote: This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder. That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who did not find this amusing. Information is missing but the whole story sure does not make the aikidoka look good.

Lyle Laizure wrote: This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder. That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

Sorry Lyle but anyone who goes into a house armed with a knife (whether the couple are elderly or not) deserves all they get.

It could so easily have been "Intruder stabs elederly martial artists in their own home"

Well done Mr & Mrs Dowdy

according to the article, the home owner did warn the intruder that he armed. the intruder kept coming. think about that scenario a bit. in this case, personally, i'd go with "be judge by 12 instead be carry by 6". on a side note, kinda interesting that the police asked folks for information when the burglar bleed all over the place. wonder if they heard of sniffing dogs.

"There was an intruder in my house. I was afraid for my life and that of my wife. I grabbed the nearest object and hit the intruder when he came at me. I did not know what the intruder wanted to do, and I was afraid for my life."

Name, rank, and serial number.

Lyle Laizure wrote: This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder. That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

Lyle, you're absolutely right in my opinion. Right and wrong are subjective , that's why it's an opinion . I'm not trying to bash anyone else. Now, I am only a white belt in aikido, very close to testing gor yellow or 5th kyu in my dojo from white, I've only been doing Aikido 6 months. So, maybe I have no room to talk. I just feel the article and mentality of their actions go against the spirit of Aikido, at least from what I've learned. Unfortunately, in western society , ESP.in America most people (including my family unfortunately) which is quite different from eastern society, ESP. Japan, there is an "eye for an eye" mentality most people have towards people, ESP. "Bad" people like petty criminals who do petty crimes in particular. Rare is the individual such as you 2 who have compassion for another human, criminal or not, are we not all brothers and sisters. People like Gandi, Jesus, and the Bishop and Jean Valgren in the unabridged version of the novel about this very thing: a man steals a loaf of bread to feed his starving children he has to raise all by himself, and his rise through redemption, not through prisons and punishment, but through compassion and love for each other and him, and deep understanding. The first book in the lengthy novel Les Miserables talks about this with the Bishop "beneview" which means "welcome" in French . The novel changed the life of many people. Some quotes from Einstein on this:

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." . And,

May they not forget to keep pure the great heritage that puts them ahead of the West: the artistic configuration of life, the simplicity and modesty of personal needs, and the purity and serenity of the Japanese soul.
Comment made after a six-week trip to Japan in November-December 1922, published in Kaizo 5, no. 1 (January 1923), 339. Einstein Archive 36-477.1. Appears in The New Quotable Einstein by Alice Calaprice (2005), p. 269.

"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence and fulfills the duty to express the results of his thoughts in clear form."

Sincerely, Kevin

Lyle Laizure wrote: a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it

Please, this is a serious thread.

Lyle Laizure wrote: Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault.

Disclaimer: IANAL, but I dated one who specialized in this, so I got an earful on more than one occasion. This is called the "duty to retreat", and while it is generally true that in most situations you have a duty to retreat if you can and if a reasonable person, placed in your situation, would not feel threatened. There are numerous exceptions, however. For example, since we're making generalizations, it's generally not the case that you have a duty to retreat within your own home, if your attacker does not also live there.

(btw, it's "imminent")

Lyle Laizure wrote: a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

A "good" prosecutor will take into account all relevant evidence for and against a conviction and use it to to decide whether to prosecute, and how to prosecute. I don't think anyone would reasonably consider the opinions of complete strangers, from various places around the world, responding to an article in an internet chat room to be a a good indicator of the potential defendant's state of mind.

No, the prosecutor won't pay much attention to what you and I say on any forum UNLESS you or I are the suspect in his case. In this day and age investigators and prosecutors usually look at social media and on-line forums to see if their subject has made relevant statements and will certainly try to introduce them into evidence at trial.

In line with Mary's comments, I strongly recommend that martial arts students research their own local laws regarding self defense. Some states establish a duty to retreat while others don't. There is no simple explanation that cuts across all jurisdictions. You simply have to know and apply the law in your jurisdiction in a situation like this, or you are in grave danger of running afoul of the law even if you feel your actions are reasonable.

Krystal Locke wrote: "There was an intruder in my house. I was afraid for my life and that of my wife. I grabbed the nearest object and hit the intruder when he came at me. I did not know what the intruder wanted to do, and I was afraid for my life." Name, rank, and serial number.

Yep.
I always assume that anybody forcibly entering my home intends me harm. How can I prudently assume otherwise?
Being a pacifist a la Ghandi has to do with political strategy and tactics, not with allowing an intruder to run about your home willy nilly and hope he doesn't hurt or kill you.

Philip Smith wrote: Sorry Lyle but anyone who goes into a house armed with a knife (whether the couple are elderly or not) deserves all they get.

At no point in the article did it say the intruder was armed with a knife or anything else. That of course doesn't mean that he wasn't. If a person breaks into a home knowing that someone is present; I would be inclined to beleive that the person was very desperate and is more than likely armed.

Krystal Locke wrote: "There was an intruder in my house. I was afraid for my life and that of my wife. I grabbed the nearest object and hit the intruder when he came at me. I did not know what the intruder wanted to do, and I was afraid for my life." Name, rank, and serial number.

Just saying it doesn't make it a fact. The article indicates that the man intentionally grabbed the weapon and then sought out the intruder. That doesn't mean he wasn't afraid but the way it is written it sure makes the old man out to be seeking the confrontation.

Kevin Tejan wrote: Lyle, you're absolutely right in my opinion. Right and wrong are subjective , that's why it's an opinion .

I will agree that right and wrong are opinion but it is society as a whole that makes that opinion. That being the law as well as the interpretation of the law. As individuals we may think what we do is right but come to find out the law doesn't agree. The verbiage in the article sure indicates that the police are questioning the homeowner's story.

Mary Malmros wrote: Disclaimer: IANAL, but I dated one who specialized in this, so I got an earful on more than one occasion. This is called the "duty to retreat", and while it is generally true that in most situations you have a duty to retreat if you can and if a reasonable person, placed in your situation, would not feel threatened. There are numerous exceptions, however. For example, since we're making generalizations, it's generally not the case that you have a duty to retreat within your own home, if your attacker does not also live there. (btw, it's "imminent")

Thank you Mary, this illustrates my point exactly. The laws are unknown to most civillians and for a lot of civilians while they think they "know" the law they will misinterpret the law thinking they are justified when in fact they are not.

Janet Rosen wrote: Yep. I always assume that anybody forcibly entering my home intends me harm. How can I prudently assume otherwise? Being a pacifist a la Ghandi has to do with political strategy and tactics, not with allowing an intruder to run about your home willy nilly and hope he doesn't hurt or kill you.

A pacifist by no means am I. If someone forcibly enters my home, especially knowing I am there, I too would believe they intended to do me harm. I also have no desire to engage the individual if it isn't necessary.

Michael Hackett wrote: No, the prosecutor won't pay much attention to what you and I say on any forum UNLESS you or I are the suspect in his case. In this day and age investigators and prosecutors usually look at social media and on-line forums to see if their subject has made relevant statements and will certainly try to introduce them into evidence at trial. In line with Mary's comments, I strongly recommend that martial arts students research their own local laws regarding self defense. Some states establish a duty to retreat while others don't. There is no simple explanation that cuts across all jurisdictions. You simply have to know and apply the law in your jurisdiction in a situation like this, or you are in grave danger of running afoul of the law even if you feel your actions are reasonable.

I agree that comments made by strangers isn't likely to impact a case like this. I know from my training that a common statement during tanto tori is..."he stabbed himself." The statement the guy in the article made...."he ran onto the knife" This statement alone, in my opinion, would be cause for closer scrutiny. No one just runs onto a knife, as if to stab himself. That would be silly. It seems to me that the Aikido community has that phrase in their vernacular. It probably isn't the best thing to say.

Robert M Watson Jr wrote: Please, this is a serious thread. Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

Followed by...

Millsy wrote: ]It's when they run into it several time it becomes annoying!

Serious indeed.

Lyle Laizure wrote: Just saying it doesn't make it a fact. The article indicates that the man intentionally grabbed the weapon and then sought out the intruder. That doesn't mean he wasn't afraid but the way it is written it sure makes the old man out to be seeking the confrontation.

Consider the news story that shall not be named....

Lyle Laizure wrote: Just saying it doesn't make it a fact. The article indicates that the man intentionally grabbed the weapon and then sought out the intruder. That doesn't mean he wasn't afraid but the way it is written it sure makes the old man out to be seeking the confrontation.

What is the alternative you suggest if you are a woman or a senior (the bb in aikido is nice but nobody at 83 has the muscle mass and proprioception of a young fit man) at home and afraid because there is an intruder who may/not be armed and whose intent you prudently must assume is malevolent? To huddle under a bed or in a closet and hope for the best? I'll be grabbing something to enhance my personal capabilities, make use of my superior ability to navigate my home in the dark and hope the decision as to where and how to engage is of my choosing (there is a reason aikido trains to elicit a specific attack).