|
|
Post by random on Jul 21, 2005 10:47:26 GMT
I was quite enjoying the discussion. Never mind, someone might add something to it later.
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 10:50:24 GMT
If you want to fight a monster you must become a monster. When I go into battle there are no half measures. It's all or nothing. I go fully committed to do damage and I wont stop until my enemy is completely neutralised
|
|
|
|
Post by andym on Jul 21, 2005 11:00:06 GMT
So you don't believe in using 'reasonable force'?
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 11:04:46 GMT
Unfortunately, we can't really choose the amount of force in a fight unless you are at an extreme advantage. eg being attacked by a child or woman etc. If you intentionally hold back then you should be prepared to lose. Nobody is going to give you the courtesy of holding back so why should you?
|
|
|
|
Post by andym on Jul 21, 2005 11:05:52 GMT
So if you knocked someone out cold you'd carry on stamping on their head?
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 11:12:43 GMT
Usually not no. It's not worth the risk of killing someone. If they are semi-consious then maybe. If they get knocked to the ground and are trying to get back up then yes I would definately stamp on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by andym on Jul 21, 2005 11:18:06 GMT
Nice....
What would your defence be in court?
|
|
|
|
Post by AngelaG on Jul 21, 2005 11:18:20 GMT
Jones
What makes you better than the thugs we are training to protect ourselves from?
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 11:25:50 GMT
Like I said. The chances of it going to court are remote. I know this for a fact. Even if it did go to court and there was CCTV showing you glasss/Stamp/kick someone to pieces, so long as they didn't die then you would almost definately not go to prison for it. I most cases you get a fine. In some cases community service. In extreme or reoccuring cases you may go to prison, but it's unlikely and you would have to be a regular troublemaker.
I would never start on some innocent person. However, if I was threatened or my family or friends were threatened then I would respond with equal ferocity. What makes me better is that I don't instigate fights. I just end them.
Anyone who thinks violence is glamourous, where you choose how to restrain people or block and defend, gracefully disposing of attackers in a casual manner has never been in a fight. You need to get stuck in with violenc and be more brutal than your opponent if you want to win.
|
|
|
|
Post by random on Jul 21, 2005 11:50:07 GMT
When you go into battle how does that fit in with head butting someone once the police are there. Lots of big talk. You cannot defend the indefensible you cannot justify injustice.
Jones are you for real or just attempting to play the devil’s advocate in the discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 12:06:11 GMT
I headbutted the guy because I wanted revenge .Maybe it wasn't the right thing to do but at the time I was extremely angry. My friend was unconsious on the ground and he was smiling about it.
The point wasn't to brag about disregarding the police or anything. I was just pointing out that the notion of not hitting people first because you will get done by the police is not that important as the police don't really care.
For example, if Angela was being hassled by some drunken fool in the take away and she punched him in the face then kicked him in the head, even if the police saw it she would definately not go to prison. She wouldn't even go to court. Therefore, pre emptive strikes are the best form of self defence in my oppinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by random on Jul 21, 2005 13:40:30 GMT
You have almost grasped the point. However, the example you give is a good one but the hassle is the first attack, the response is not pre-emptive it is responsive. But as an individual we must be sure that the first move against us, whatever form it takes, is truly an attack…then we may respond in manner befitting the situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by jones on Jul 21, 2005 13:48:31 GMT
Well then it's too late.
You don't wait to be attacked. Especially if your tanked up on ale. Hit first and hit hard. You will know if someone wants to attack you if the are stalking you or moving towards you with verbal dialogue eg - "What the f*ck you looking at you f*cking Pr*ck? Do you f*cking want a go?" - It's pretty obvious that an attack will soon be comeing as this is the dialogue that comes before an attack. This is the time you say something like "Sorry can you repeat that please?" Then before he has time to respond - and his brain is engaged thinking of a response - punch him as hard as you can in the face. If he doesn't go down then punch him again until he does. If he tries to get back up stamp on his head a few times to make sure he stays down.
You cant do it half heartedly either. You have to be brutal violent and fercious. Have one goal in mind and that is to completely destroy th thing in front of you. If you have a glass handy then smash that in his face. Hit him with anything that comes to hand. Just make sure he's not left standing.
|
|
|
|
Post by random on Jul 21, 2005 14:07:37 GMT
Isn’t that what I just said, you define attack as a strike. It doesn’t have to be, an attack can take many a different guise, a look, posture, verbal. That is why I said we must look at the social and historic position of the tenets of our art whatever style it is, and find their position within our life and the society in which we live, again your example is prescriptive and predictable. Try staggering away instead of laying in, put space between you both you may then not have to resort to violence. Although, I have to concede the point that there is no point being half hearted if ones safety is really in danger, but one must remain in control, glassing someone is not self defence and you will waste beer.
|
|
|
|
Post by AngelaG on Jul 23, 2005 20:16:02 GMT
|
|
