Aggression on the Roads...

[Europa1]

sebulban said:

ANY martial art, even ones I don't think are effective in proper combat, will RUIN some civilian on the street.

Quoted for posterity.

[julian64]

Europa1 said:

sebulban said:

ANY martial art, even ones I don't think are effective in proper combat, will RUIN some civilian on the street.

Quoted for posterity.

This is going to end up as a legendary thread for all the one liners.

[Centurion07]

Europa1 said:

So what was your reference to civilians all about?

Chumps with no skills that will get ruined and end up in intensive care or a coma.

[Ultrafunkula]

I wonder how many incidents of road rage have been started by thugs trained in martial arts etc. who wouldn't have got out of their cars if they weren't trained? Or even how many incidents could have been completely avoided if the victim just drove off/remained in the car rather than got out of the car?
I did some martial arts when I was young and I remember the feeling of bravery they create which might make people respond to agression more actively than they need to.

I'm not a pacifist, but I firmly believe violence should be kept off the roads. After all, does it matter who starts the fight if the kids in the car behind have to watch adults beating seven shades out of each other? There's a time and a place to solve problems that way.

[anonymous-user]

sebulban said:

• *edit***

Apart from yonex who I hope gets SMASHED ;-)

Whilst I am flattered, you really need to be focusing on something more constructive.

[julian64]

It is my impression that in everyone who does martial arts, there is a little Steven Seagal voice buried deep. Its the voice of self confidence.

This is a voice which says 'I don't attack people because I'm trained, but I'm happy in the knowledge that if I did they'd crumble' just like they do in Seagal movies.

This isn't reality, its self confidence. Its how you make soldiers go into war. Its psychology 101. Its also a sham.

[anonymous-user]

Ultrafunkula said:

I wonder how many incidents of road rage have been started by thugs trained in martial arts etc. who wouldn't have got out of their cars if they weren't trained? Or even how many incidents could have been completely avoided if the victim just drove off/remained in the car rather than got out of the car?
I did some martial arts when I was young and I remember the feeling of bravery they create which might make people respond to agression more actively than they need to.

I'm not a pacifist, but I firmly believe violence should be kept off the roads. After all, does it matter who starts the fight if the kids in the car behind have to watch adults beating seven shades out of each other? There's a time and a place to solve problems that way.

A fair number probably. It's fairly normal when you start training to believe that whatever it is you are learning will suddenly make you invincible. A guy who used to train with us, fairly new to it, got into it one evening and attempted to kick someone, slipped and he ended up on the floor getting a good hiding. The instructor, who was actually a proper hard nut fell about laughing, he was always saying 'Dan don't make the man', but I would add, unless it does

You never know who you are going to be dealing with and the reality check (for me anyway) was walking into a competition with all these normal looking people that once inside were at various stages of hurting people, some UK squad members, some just head cases. Add to that the high probability that most nut jobs carry something sharp it all adds up to a really bad idea getting involved.

[SuperchargedVR6]

VonSenger said:

And anyway, my dads harder than your dad.

No he ain't. I erd your dad got his head kicked in by Tommy Payne's dad for dossin 2s on his bird's fag behind the bike sheds.

[SuperchargedVR6]

sebulban said:

xRIEx said:

Yes they're out there, and in something like 250,000 miles of driving I'm fairly sure I've crossed paths with a few of them; in all those miles and all those crossed paths, not one encounter has ever come to violence.

If you have a significantly higher hit rate (no pun intended), then possibly the fundamental variable in the situation is you.

"You can lead a horse to water ... etc. etc." How about: "if all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

Did you read the topic of the thread?

Cool you have never encountered any issues. Thats a small sample group. It seems the OP and various other people HAVE. I am one of those people who has. And a key variable is mileage.... I was doing 20,000 miles a year. I think i also posted originally, before the conversation developed, that I have made LOADS of errors. But I simply put my hand up and apologise. Its when OTHER people make mistakes who cannot take responsibility.... who then proceed to escalate things. My point many posts back was why would you turn anything violent when you cannot back it up.

And for the record I haven't had LOADS of road rage incidents - its a couple lol. And as I said I consider myself the victim..... initially.

P1ss taking aside, that's fair enough. Everyone loves to see a trouble making punk get taken down. They just won't admit it on a public forum.

Come on, own up, you are this guy aren't you? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTG8DMeH4O4

[sebulban]

Ultrafunkula said:

I wonder how many incidents of road rage have been started by thugs trained in martial arts etc. who wouldn't have got out of their cars if they weren't trained? Or even how many incidents could have been completely avoided if the victim just drove off/remained in the car rather than got out of the car?
I did some martial arts when I was young and I remember the feeling of bravery they create which might make people respond to agression more actively than they need to.

I'm not a pacifist, but I firmly believe violence should be kept off the roads. After all, does it matter who starts the fight if the kids in the car behind have to watch adults beating seven shades out of each other? There's a time and a place to solve problems that way.

MUCH smaller than the thugs/idiots who use violence for a laugh without any care for the consequences. You have idiots in all areas of life though so its unavoidable. In our gym, and maybe because the town is small so people talk, if ANY of our guys from beginner to coach use their skills or start fights for no reason they get banned. And don't get me wrong over 10 years its a handful of people - but one guy was banned a few weeks just for being around when a fight took place not even involved. And the other guy, who we still are friends with, got a life ban.

The two major incidents I have been confronted with were a guy hitting my window at a red light in traffic after getting out of his vehicle and another guy who I had stopped for, in Bristol, to exchange insurance details with.

My overriding feeling though is I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6. My default position is not violence. It never has been. But I look around at society and its not the MMA guys or boxers out on a Saturday fighting in packs or hitting people with weapons.

[sebulban]

Centurion07 said:

Chumps with no skills that will get ruined and end up in intensive care or a coma.

What you do find on a thread like this, especially where something primal like violence is being talked about - it brings out a lot of people who rather than discuss things want to take pot shots and get bites.

The term is used within the fight scene to describe the general public. Thats all. But Im sure some of you will focus on that and have a problem rather than contributing - probably because you can't.

:-)

[sebulban]

julian64 said:

It is my impression that in everyone who does martial arts, there is a little Steven Seagal voice buried deep. Its the voice of self confidence.

This is a voice which says 'I don't attack people because I'm trained, but I'm happy in the knowledge that if I did they'd crumble' just like they do in Seagal movies.

This isn't reality, its self confidence. Its how you make soldiers go into war. Its psychology 101. Its also a sham.

What is a sham? That someone who dedicates themselves to a craft may improve. Thats false logic or just dumb.

A guy starts at football.... everyone else is decent. He is getting rings ran around him. Years later he is the one running rings round people who show up. The other guys have progressed on.

It just happens thats in martial arts / MMA / boxing the rings are people getting smashed!

Now when doing statistics you always get idiots who aren't very good and think they have some magical power. I saw a video shared on FB yesterday of some guy in the States showing some shambolic methods that like traditional martial arts just aren't functional on the streets. But thats a tiny sample group!

[sebulban]

SuperchargedVR6 said:

P1ss taking aside, that's fair enough. Everyone loves to see a trouble making punk get taken down. They just won't admit it on a public forum.

Come on, own up, you are this guy aren't you? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTG8DMeH4O4

Haha I've seen that before.

And fits in nicely with some of the comments I made earlier, before the idiot brigade started, about not knowing who you are dealing with.

But no its not me.... but I did smile eating my porridge!

[knitware]

sebulban said:

I look around at society and its not the MMA guys or boxers out on a Saturday fighting in packs or hitting people with weapons.

I guess that's because the MMA guys release their aggression and pent up frustrations by getting together and thrashing each other around the ring...

[sebulban]

knitware said:

I guess that's because the MMA guys release their aggression and pent up frustrations by getting together and thrashing each other around the ring...

Hit the nail on the head.

Like Rugby guys. There is an outlet.

Why would a reasonable level MMA guy/boxer even want to bother with some street brawler?

As I have said before the debate on that front was done in 1991!

This thread got hijacked by people to take pot shots at Jiu Jitsu etc. Which is a shame but I will still put my points forward & be correct.

Ultimately aggression on the road is made up of a number of idiots who are no doubt idiots away from their vehicle. My overriding point to go with that is why do people, with no ability in a fight scenario, use violence. Imagine some random walking up to Ronnie O Sullivan and mouthing off he would beat him in a frame of snooker. Now I am not saying I am his equivalent in MMA but the difference with fight sports is you don't get a century break put on you, you get a beating!

[Centurion07]

sebulban said:

What you do find on a thread like this, especially where something primal like violence is being talked about - it brings out a lot of people who rather than discuss things want to take pot shots and get bites.

The term is used within the fight scene to describe the general public. Thats all. But Im sure some of you will focus on that and have a problem rather than contributing - probably because you can't.

:-)

I think the issue you're finding here is no matter what your experience, when you use phrases like the ones I highlighted above, you lose most, if not all, credibility in the eyes of the very people you're purporting to educate.

If Bruce Lee came on here and started throwing phrases around like the ones you've used, he'd get ridiculed as well, so a random that none of us actually knows isn't going to be given much respect in that regard.

FWIW, I happen to agree with you; a trained fighter is going to stand a much better chance against someone with no training. That said, in the real world of streetfights, I don't think the odds are quite as stacked as you claim.

[sebulban]

Centurion07 said:

I think the issue you're finding here is no matter what your experience, when you use phrases like the ones I highlighted above, you lose most, if not all, credibility in the eyes of the very people you're purporting to educate.

If Bruce Lee came on here and started throwing phrases around like the ones you've used, he'd get ridiculed as well, so a random that none of us actually knows isn't going to be given much respect in that regard.

FWIW, I happen to agree with you; a trained fighter is going to stand a much better chance against someone with no training. That said, in the real world of streetfights, I don't think the odds are quite as stacked as you claim.

They are and I have seen them. LOL the real world of street fighting. And I am the one who needs credibility......

If you go back and read how the thread went I didn't just come on here mouthing off. I KEEP reiterating my initial point due to the strawmen that have come up.

[TurboHatchback]

Ultrafunkula said:

I wonder how many incidents of road rage have been started by thugs trained in martial arts etc. who wouldn't have got out of their cars if they weren't trained? Or even how many incidents could have been completely avoided if the victim just drove off/remained in the car rather than got out of the car?
I did some martial arts when I was young and I remember the feeling of bravery they create which might make people respond to agression more actively than they need to.

I'm not a pacifist, but I firmly believe violence should be kept off the roads. After all, does it matter who starts the fight if the kids in the car behind have to watch adults beating seven shades out of each other? There's a time and a place to solve problems that way.

This is the pertinent point, the only way that a disagreement on the road will turn into physical violence is when two nuggets both think they're well 'ard and stop, get out, puff their chests out and try to prove that they're the more manly. If who's actually more 'ard becomes of any relevance then several catastrophic failures of judgement have already occurred.

Normal, rational, non-'ard people will
A: Drive in a manner which accommodates incompetent and aggressive driving by others
B: just let slights go and drive on
C: Never get out the car
D: If threatened drive off and call the police
E: If threatened and blocked then use the car as a weapon and drive straight through the other chap. MMA Ninja skills will not help you in a fight with 2 tons of steel.

[Ultrafunkula]

yonex said:

A fair number probably. It's fairly normal when you start training to believe that whatever it is you are learning will suddenly make you invincible. A guy who used to train with us, fairly new to it, got into it one evening and attempted to kick someone, slipped and he ended up on the floor getting a good hiding. The instructor, who was actually a proper hard nut fell about laughing, he was always saying 'Dan don't make the man', but I would add, unless it does

You never know who you are going to be dealing with and the reality check (for me anyway) was walking into a competition with all these normal looking people that once inside were at various stages of hurting people, some UK squad members, some just head cases. Add to that the high probability that most nut jobs carry something sharp it all adds up to a really bad idea getting involved.

I did Judo and Karate when I was at secondary school (under duress at first from my parents admittedly) and really enjoyed it. I remember having less fear of the more aggressive kids at school after a while but was always a bit wary about letting my new confidence get me into trouble that I didn't need!
I think martial arts are very beneficial in general, but I also think there are high stress situations which can trigger their use unnecesarily.

sebulban said:

My overriding feeling though is I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6. My default position is not violence. It never has been. But I look around at society and its not the MMA guys or boxers out on a Saturday fighting in packs or hitting people with weapons.

Not always I'm sure, due to the low numbers of them compared with untrained people. That doesn't excuse their use though, you have more of a resposibility to excercise restraint than an untrained member of the public.
If that's your personal ethos too then good on you, I'd have much respect for someone trained who never used their training as they knew never to find themselves in such a situation.

[Europa1]

Centurion07 said:

I think the issue you're finding here is no matter what your experience, when you use phrases like the ones I highlighted above, you lose most, if not all, credibility in the eyes of the very people you're purporting to educate.

If Bruce Lee came on here and started throwing phrases around like the ones you've used, he'd get ridiculed as well, so a random that none of us actually knows isn't going to be given much respect in that regard.

FWIW, I happen to agree with you; a trained fighter is going to stand a much better chance against someone with no training. That said, in the real world of streetfights, I don't think the odds are quite as stacked as you claim.

Yep, sums it up. A group of people who are in fact civilians referring to other civilians as civilians, coupled with some jargon like "submission grappling" and equating it to having a special power, is not the way to win people over to your point of view.