I say instructor do not teach ALL they know to ALL of their students. Regardless of your intention a student will quit on you and you will not have taught them all that you know. Sematics I know but true non-the-less.But of course. It was semantics, to be sure. I was speaking of teaching in a rank-appropriate manner, and an age-appropriate manner. Of course I don't teach minors anything to do with firearms or most other weapons (except my own kids, of course). Nor do I teach, say, an 8th gup (yellow belt in our style) how to do 1st gup (red belt in our style) techniques. Not because of any notion of honor or worthiness, but because it would simply be a waste of time - the student is too low of a rank to understand the stuff at the higher levels.
Once they get to a rank that contains techniques X, Y, and Z, I teach them X, Y, and Z. If they are not honorable or intend to use the knowledge nefariously, I can do nothing about that UNLESS I know their evil intentions. In such a case, I'd stop teaching them and they would no longer be my student.

Who am I? I am the one legally responsible for the person's education in the martial arts. I doubt you are as legally responsible as you may have been led to believe. No prosecutor in the land would hold you accountable, if, for example, you taught someone how to strike the temple with a hammer fist and they did so unjustifiably, resulting in someone's untimely death. Can a driving instructor be held responsible for a student who kills someone with a car, intentionally or not? Of course not. My CPL (Concealed Pistol License) instructor, who oddly enough teaches people how to conceal and shoot a pistol, is no more legally responsible for it if the person then goes and robs a bank with those skills.

Is it not also possible that your student, having earned some level of skill and rank with you, is training at the same time with some other instructor who is teaching him the 'bad things' you don't want him to know? How could you ever control that? You wouldn't know unless he told you. And you could never be held liable for such a thing.

I AM the judge of their worth in that realm. And while I will teach the fundamentals to all I will not teach ALL that I know to just anyone, and the is MY right and my responsibility to society to keep the things I know with those that I JUDGE to be responsible to use them appropriately. They can kill just as readily (even more readily, I would say) with the 'fundamentals' as they can with the Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock. Once they've internalized your 'fundamental' techniques and tactics, if they decide to become a criminal and hide the fact from you, what are you going to do about it? You'd never know.

You don't give a 2 year old a razor - and if you do then I can see you have no judgement - you give people the skills, knowledge and tools when they are ready. Not just becus they are an adult. Trust me you don't want me teaching just anyone ALL that I know especially if they might someday live near your neighborhood, not without some form of judgement.<Chuckle!> I would gladly have someone you have trained living near me, sir. I am sure they would be model citizens and would come to my aid if I needed it! And if they tried to put your version of the dreaded Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock on me, I'd just blow their brains out and be done with it. I guarantee you I have people living 'near' me that would make your hair curl! The thing is, you don't know, you can't know, that maybe one of your top disciples, who knows the deep dark secrets of your art, used his skills to run his own biker gang or start his own cult or something.

The odds are vanishingly small that any one of us (as trained martial artists of high skill level) will EVER face another trained martial artist. MUCH more likely, you will face some guy who has spent the last 20 years in prison, lifting weights and practicing unarmed and armed combat every day. THAT is the guy I am training my students to defend against. I am NOT AT ALL worried that one of my students will take what I teach him and use it the 'wrong' way.

The right to judge my students is that of being the INSTRUCTOR. I'm sorry but that simple statement from you is a sign of things wrong in the world. "What right do you have to say my child is a failure?"I didn't say anything of the sort. I've also had plenty of experience with parents who think their little darlings can do no wrong, or who deserve a trophy/promotion/whatever just for showing up. If they can't handle it, or don't like that I gave them 50 push-ups for scratching their ear during kata, I send 'em packing; I don't need their money, I have a day job.

It seems to me that, as the instructor, you should have ALREADY decided (or been able to discern) that your students are worthy of instruction. Not just the 5 out of 20000 to which you can teach the deepest darkest most deadly techniques, but all of them. If the secret, deadly, nasty techniques are too dangerous to teach them, how then could you have taught them the run-of-the-mill stuff, with which they can just as easily kill someone? Once I decide a student isn't working out like I want (for whatever reason), they're gone. If they stay and I train them, then when they get to the appropriate rank and age, they get to learn the secret Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock just like everybody else.

So you have no problem with me teaching anyone and everyone of m y students how to make and IED?OF COURSE NOT! By all means, teach them! IF the IED were a weapon that can be legally used by a citizen, why not? But it's NOT legal, so it's a moot point. But I gladly teach rifle, pistol, shotgun, to all who are of the right age and rank, why not? Look, to badly paraphrase a line from the NRA, it's not the technique that kills, it's the person doing the technique.

Do you want me teach just anyone the materials that allow an officer to be hit with his own TASER without ill effect?If it's legal, yes, SURE! We have police officers in our organization, and we regularly practice 'dangerous' things like weapon retention, and handcuffing, with ALL our students who are of the right rank and age. And how do you teach a cop to retain his weapons, or to handcuff properly? You must also teach how to TAKE a weapon from someone (cop or not) and how to AVOID being handcuffed. Otherwise, just like with knowing the right way to cut someone in knife fighting, they won't know how to do it properly. How do you know that someday one of your students might not end up fighting a rogue police officer, or some nutcase who is trained in police tactics and is armed with police weapons, and your boy can't use the officer's stupid TASER against him because you never showed him how?

My martial arts and science are truly martial and some level of my knowledge can not be given away, not ALL are WORTHY. That may well be. But if you have students who are not 'worthy' of the deep dark dangerous only-the-master-can-know-them techniques, then you shouldn't be teaching them ANYTHING, not even the basics. Because they can use the 'basic' stuff to kill with, if they're of that mindset. You not teaching them some super-secret advanced nerve strike or whatever isn't going to keep the rest of 'society' safe - you've already taught them all they need to know to kill. If I had a student get to a high level, let's say 2nd or 3rd degree black belt, and THEN I found out that they weren't 'worthy' of my Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock, I'd already be a failure having brought them as far as I did without discerning that they were 'unworthy.'

I can't see teaching my children every method of countering a restraining hold, especially the holds that I teach teachers for dealing with unruley students (things that they can do without lawsuit) I don't want children knowing how to get out of them.Why? What if the teacher is a pervert, intent on molesting the child? How can you hold back the knowledge and training to allow them to escape such a situation? Some would say that's almost criminal in itself!

Is it elitest? NO it is RESPONSIBLE! Elitist may have been the wrong word.

I am sure this doesn't apply to you, but quite often instructors hold back what they claim are super-secret deadly techniques in order to maintain a mysticism around themselves. Quite often these instructors are running a cult of personality, not a true martial art school, perhaps because their martial art is their business and livelihood, or maybe they just get off on the power trip. They find they need to keep the illusion that they are all-powerful (and so attract more students, sell more books, etc.) by 'retaining' some level of secret, hidden knowledge, only to be passed on to their most favored pupils, as the all-knowing master lies on his deathbed.
Ugh, it sounds like a bad chop-socky movie.

Goodness I love a good discussion

QuickSabre responds to me wrote:


Who am I? I am the one legally responsible for the person's education in the martial arts.

I doubt you are as legally responsible as you may have been led to believe. No prosecutor in the land would hold you accountable, if, for example, you taught someone how to strike the temple with a hammer fist and they did so unjustifiably, resulting in someone's untimely death. Can a driving instructor be held responsible for a student who kills someone with a car, intentionally or not? Of course not. My CPL (Concealed Pistol License) instructor, who oddly enough teaches people how to conceal and shoot a pistol, is no more legally responsible for it if the person then goes and robs a bank with those skills.

Ah but there have already been cases of instructors being sued, none as of this date have been successfully sued mind you, but it has already happend and the instructor has to defend the suit. That takes time and money, they can't just ignore it. In the USA (land of the lawsuit) we must always be prepared to someday be held accountable. Now let me add that I should also have stated that as an Instructor I am MORALLY responsible, for what I teach.

Is it not also possible that your student, having earned some level of skill and rank with you, is training at the same time with some other instructor who is teaching him the 'bad things' you don't want him to know? How could you ever control that? You wouldn't know unless he told you. And you could never be held liable for such a thing.

That is true, because I control what I teach, because I know what skill sets I have never instructed them in. And I can't be held to that liability, but what is my history in teaching? Do I have students that can show that I have discretion in my teaching? Does my past history show that I don't teach everything I know to ALL of my students? Because if my past shows that I have the potential to teach everything I know to any and all students that I have, then if it can be proven that I had taught it to one, could I have taught it to another?


I AM the judge of their worth in that realm. And while I will teach the fundamentals to all I will not teach ALL that I know to just anyone, and the is MY right and my responsibility to society to keep the things I know with those that I JUDGE to be responsible to use them appropriately.

They can kill just as readily (even more readily, I would say) with the 'fundamentals' as they can with the Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock. Once they've internalized your 'fundamental' techniques and tactics, if they decide to become a criminal and hide the fact from you, what are you going to do about it? You'd never know.

But this is the problem and the simple truth of what I teach and I don't think you are getting the drift. What I teach is not for everyone. Basically what I teach can classified as follows:

[video type=biku][/video]1. Civillian Defensive Arts
A. Unarmed Self-Defense
B. Armed Self-Defense
1. Firearms
a. Open-Carry
b. Conceal Carry
2. Edged Weapons
3. Blunt Impact Weapons
4. Weapon Retention
2. Law Enforcement Tactics
A. Verbal Tactics
B. Physical Tactics
1. Physical Controls
2. Restraints
3. Impact controls
C. Non-Lethal Weapons
1. Baton
2. OC Spray
3. TASER
D. Lethal Options
1. Sidearm
3. Military Combatives
A. Armed Responses
1. M-16
2. M-4
3. MP5
4. M-9
6. M240 November
7. M2HB (.50)
8. MK 19
9. Combat Knife
B. Improvised weapons
1. Explosives
2. Available resources
C. Unarmed Responses
This is when the pucker factor has really gone wrong. There is no controlled responses here like in the Civillian or even the law enforcement world. This is the straight to life taking aspects. [/li]
I will say it once again one has to be selective in the teachings one gives out. Now most instructors don't have this problem. MOST instructors teach civillians only. Some teach civillians and law enforecement. Few teach as I do, civ, leo, and military.

You don't give a 2 year old a razor - and if you do then I can see you have no judgement - you give people the skills, knowledge and tools when they are ready. Not just becus they are an adult. Trust me you don't want me teaching just anyone ALL that I know especially if they might someday live near your neighborhood, not without some form of judgement.

<Chuckle!> I would gladly have someone you have trained living near me, sir. I am sure they would be model citizens and would come to my aid if I needed it! And if they tried to put your version of the dreaded Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock on me, I'd just blow their brains out and be done with it. I guarantee you I have people living 'near' me that would make your hair curl! The thing is, you don't know, you can't know, that maybe one of your top disciples, who knows the deep dark secrets of your art, used his skills to run his own biker gang or start his own cult or something.

As I highlighted in the quote the key here is just anyone. I have had many students. Besides you don't want to be worried about anyone just using a "Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock" on you. But do you want just ANY of my firearms students who asked about LONG RANGE MARKSMANSHIP skills to be just taught them? Hey the show me they can handle a firearm, and they have good marksman skills, but they want to take a deer down from over 800 yds? Well heck I could teach that, I am a designated marksman and all that. I am a Rangemaster, so why not. I mean he is offering me payment for the time to teach him right? NO! I mean come on its a skill that you don't need. I mean he could be only wanting to take down game from long range but why? A good hunter wants to be sure of his kill, and besides they like to work on stalking abit anyhow. This is the skills of a sniper, I mean designated marksman ;) Neither of us can protect against these people, so i am select in who I teach, pretty much only those that Uncle Sam says to teach.

[Quote]
The odds are vanishingly small that any one of us (as trained martial artists of high skill level) will EVER face another trained martial artist. MUCH more likely, you will face some guy who has spent the last 20 years in prison, lifting weights and practicing unarmed and armed combat every day. THAT is the guy I am training my students to defend against. I am NOT AT ALL worried that one of my students will take what I teach him and use it the 'wrong' way.[/quote]

The thing you must realize is that I am NOT the same as you. I teach more than civillians. I face these darwinian individuals on a daily basis as a Correctional Officer I see what criminals are doing while incarcerated. And these are the guys I can't do enough to train my friends, family, and students to protect against. But it requires us to be select. Criminals in the Omaha area do know me. Some have even found out that I teach in the area. And being that I study the gang markings from the area gang units if I ever see a person with said tats in my school they will be booted out on their ear. But what if they don't have markings? What if they are simply getting the skills I have and bringing it back to their brothers?

I am also an Combatives Instructor to US Military and allied personnel. I have faced terrorists, I have trained people that face them daily. Despite what i have seen by some instructors out there I'm not going to molly-coddle and say that I teach the civillians the same way because I don't. As of right now the USA is not like Isreal. If it ever becomes like that I may make some major changes, but until then....


The right to judge my students is that of being the INSTRUCTOR. I'm sorry but that simple statement from you is a sign of things wrong in the world. "What right do you have to say my child is a failure?"

I didn't say anything of the sort.

Ah but you did make the statement "Who are you to judge a person worthy of...." I'm going back to that statement. Simply put I am the INSTRUCTOR and it is my knowledge, and my right to judge you worthy of learning.


It seems to me that, as the instructor, you should have ALREADY decided (or been able to discern) that your students are worthy of instruction. Not just the 5 out of 20000 to which you can teach the deepest darkest most deadly techniques, but all of them. If the secret, deadly, nasty techniques are too dangerous to teach them, how then could you have taught them the run-of-the-mill stuff, with which they can just as easily kill someone?

But guess what it is very difficult to kill someone with the fundamental techniques of NON-LETHAL self-defense. Not impossible mind you but difficult. No because our school doesn't run background checks on each and every student that comes through our doors we have character checks. Almost every school does. These character checks help reveal what they are after. Eventually like you state:

Once I decide a student isn't working out like I want (for whatever reason), they're gone. If they stay and I train them, then when they get to the appropriate rank and age, they get to learn the secret Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock just like everybody else.

So you have no problem with me teaching anyone and everyone of m y students how to make and IED?

OF COURSE NOT! By all means, teach them! IF the IED were a weapon that can be legally used by a citizen, why not? But it's NOT legal, so it's a moot point. But I gladly teach rifle, pistol, shotgun, to all who are of the right age and rank, why not? Look, to badly paraphrase a line from the NRA, it's not the technique that kills, it's the person doing the technique.

But I'll tell you something I know how to teach this. By your statement I should teach everything I know to my students, don't hold them back. The materials of an IED are not illegal. How about an improvised firearm? (Like the Gorn Episode of Star Trek)


Do you want me teach just anyone the materials that allow an officer to be hit with his own TASER without ill effect?

If it's legal, yes, SURE! We have police officers in our organization, and we regularly practice 'dangerous' things like weapon retention, and handcuffing, with ALL our students who are of the right rank and age. And how do you teach a cop to retain his weapons, or to handcuff properly? You must also teach how to TAKE a weapon from someone (cop or not) and how to AVOID being handcuffed. Otherwise, just like with knowing the right way to cut someone in knife fighting, they won't know how to do it properly. How do you know that someday one of your students might not end up fighting a rogue police officer, or some nutcase who is trained in police tactics and is armed with police weapons, and your boy can't use the officer's stupid TASER against him because you never showed him how?

And my law enforcement students practice the same things. On each other. Sure someday a cop may go rogue BUT I'll go to hell first before I give any citizen a heads up about how to fight off another badge holder. The image of fighting off a rogue officer is a fantasy. BTW anyone with a firearm has police weapons. TASERS are available for civilian use they even incapaciatate longer (30 sec vs LEO 5 sec) - The C2 by TASER Int'l is a wonderful tool and I teach many people how to use it. Important to note though if a person points a TASER at an LEO they are in a LETHAL FORCE situation nd justified in shooting them with their sidearm.


I can't see teaching my children every method of countering a restraining hold, especially the holds that I teach teachers for dealing with unruley students (things that they can do without lawsuit) I don't want children knowing how to get out of them.

Why? What if the teacher is a pervert, intent on molesting the child? How can you hold back the knowledge and training to allow them to escape such a situation? Some would say that's almost criminal in itself!

AHHH but this perverted teacher has to change their attack. They have to move from a technique which purpose is entirely to hold and aggressive person in a safe posisition with out harm to the teacher while authorities arrive - to a position that allows them to molest them. THIS type of hold doesn't exist. To do so means my child will then be able to escape and control the environmental possiblities, because said teacher went beyond the training and rather than using it properly tried to go beyond and molest my child. To do this puts them in a position that allows children to fight back. Believe me I have researched this possiblity LONG before I ever developed my educators self-defense program.



I am sure this doesn't apply to you, but quite often instructors hold back what they claim are super-secret deadly techniques in order to maintain a mysticism around themselves. Quite often these instructors are running a cult of personality, not a true martial art school, perhaps because their martial art is their business and livelihood, or maybe they just get off on the power trip. They find they need to keep the illusion that they are all-powerful (and so attract more students, sell more books, etc.) by 'retaining' some level of secret, hidden knowledge, only to be passed on to their most favored pupils, as the all-knowing master lies on his deathbed.
Ugh, it sounds like a bad chop-socky movie.

Oh so you know Tae Young Kim too eh? LOL I really don't need a power trip my life is empowering enough. I am a Correctional Officer, Civillian Defense Instructor, LEO Defensive Tactics Instructor, and Non-Lethal Weapons Instructor, a Military Combatives instructor, firearms instructor, but the most empowering things I am is a husband and father.

Goodness I love a good discussionNo doubt! This is fun! We may agree about more than we disagree, but nonetheless...

Ah but there have already been cases of instructors being sued, none as of this date have been successfully sued mind you, but it has already happend and the instructor has to defend the suit.Of course, and so what? Yes it's expensive, but as you know, ANY case of self-defense will end up in court, I don't care if you use a mild backhand slap or a bazooka. That's why you have insurance.

Now let me add that I should also have stated that as an Instructor I am MORALLY responsible, for what I teach.I assumed so, and I think you did state it. But even more than being morally responsible to ensure that I don't teach people the 'wrong' things (or teach the 'right' things to the 'wrong' people) - I have a larger moral responsibility to teach my poor civilian students to defend their lives from whomever may try to take them. And yes, rogue cops DO exist.

That is true, because I control what I teach, because I know what skill sets I have never instructed them in. And I can't be held to that liability, but what is my history in teaching? Do I have students that can show that I have discretion in my teaching? Does my past history show that I don't teach everything I know to ALL of my students? Because if my past shows that I have the potential to teach everything I know to any and all students that I have, then if it can be proven that I had taught it to one, could I have taught it to another?A good lawyer will get past all those 'defenses.' But more likely, a good prosecutor will not allow the charges to be brought. Civil court is another matter, of course, but I'll take the chance, on the probability that more good is achieved by having my students know more, rather than less, about how to defend themselves.

But this is the problem and the simple truth of what I teach and I don't think you are getting the drift. What I teach is not for everyone.Then maybe THAT is the crux of our differences. What I teach IS for everyone, not a select few.


This is when the pucker factor has really gone wrong. There is no controlled responses here like in the Civillian or even the law enforcement world. This is the straight to life taking aspects.Well, I think civilians have more leeway regarding use of force, deadly or not, in many self-defense situations than law enforcement or the military. If I think my life is being threatened (or the life of a helpless other that I decide to defend) I can use deadly force to stop the attack. Of course I must stop my response as soon as the attack threat is gone, but I am not concerned with detaining the perp, bringing him to justice, defending the whole neighborhood, or preventing the perp from running/driving away to do his mayhem elsewhere. Also, as a mere civilian, I am not duty-bound to stay and handle the situation (like I assume a cop would be?), in fact, it would be stupid of me to stay if the chance to run away presents itself in the middle of the event.

As I highlighted in the quote the key here is just anyone. I have had many students. Besides you don't want to be worried about anyone just using a "Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock" on you. But do you want just ANY of my firearms students who asked about LONG RANGE MARKSMANSHIP skills to be just taught them?
That's just it. I DON'T CARE one way or the other - I'm sure they would improve the neighborhood! Trust me, long range marksmanship is not on the 'Top Ten List' of what gets people in Detroit killed! Again, I am not concerned with military or police being taught military or police methods/equipment/techniques - I am concerned with civilians learning the most they can legally employ to defend themselves, in a rank/age-appropriate manner.

The thing you must realize is that I am NOT the same as you.I get that, I really do. As I stated before, this isn't my day job and I don't consider myself the all-knowing expert. I am just a civilian instructor who teaches his people how to stay alive, no matter who they have to face.

As of right now the USA is not like Isreal. If it ever becomes like that I may make some major changes, but until then....Speaking of Israel, we also teach Krav Maga, and I'd say you learn deadly techniques and mindset from Day 1 in that kind of training. No way to filter out the miscreants beforehand. We just observe them as they train - if they somehow display a lack of character that we deem they won't 'grow out of', then they are gone. We don't need their money to make the rent. We just train our students, and if they stick it out, they're usually of high moral caliber. We're not Sunday-school teachers by any stretch of the imagination but the training, as most martial artists will attest, complements that sort of behavior.

But guess what it is very difficult to kill someone with the fundamental techniques of NON-LETHAL self-defense. Not impossible mind you but difficult. I'd say it's much harder to teach someone to be NON-lethal than to be lethal. A punch can kill and can be taught and learned fairly easily. A manipulative joint lock, applied so as to not harm the person, takes a LOT more skill to teach and learn.

But I'll tell you something I know how to teach this. By your statement I should teach everything I know to my students, don't hold them back. The materials of an IED are not illegal. How about an improvised firearm? (Like the Gorn Episode of Star Trek)I like Star Trek too...if they were trapped somewhere and had the implements to make a weapon, why not. Again, it's not the gun that kills, it's the person holding the gun. On another note (okay, tangent) I think it would be fine if civilians were allowed to own the same military hardware as, well, the military. The 2nd Amendment doesn't say '...hunting arms...' or '...self-defense arms...' it says '...arms...' as in the military hardware of the day. To protect against not just criminals (or to shoot Bambi) but to protect against tyranny by your own government.

And my law enforcement students practice the same things. On each other.Again, there we differ. I teach people how to recognize if a cop is handcuffing them correctly, and if the situation calls for it, how to get out of it, in most cases by being very ungentle to the 'handcuffer.'

AHHH but this perverted teacher has to change their attack. They have to move from a technique which purpose is entirely to hold and aggressive person in a safe posisition with out harm to the teacher while authorities arrive - to a position that allows them to molest them. THIS type of hold doesn't exist.Arguable. Successful rapists and many rape victims might disagree.
To do so means my child will then be able to escape and control the environmental possiblities, because said teacher went beyond the training and rather than using it properly tried to go beyond and molest my child.I beg to differ. That's too much for the kid to think about. It needs to be SIMPLE or it just won't work. (Okay, that's the Krav Maga talking, but it's true).

Oh so you know Tae Young Kim too eh? LOL I know the type all too well, sadly. 'Professional' self-defense/martial arts teachers who are making their next car payment by swindling as many students as possible with Eastern mysticism and legends of their own secret, deadly techniques that can only be taught to a select few.

I am is a husband and father.Me too. And my 12-year old knows how, when and whom to shoot.

BTW - I KNOW you're just dying to learn my 'Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock!' Admit it already!

Quicksabre wrote:
Speaking of Israel, we also teach Krav Maga, and I'd say you learn deadly techniques and mindset from Day 1 in that kind of training. No way to filter out the miscreants beforehand. We just observe them as they train - if they somehow display a lack of character that we deem they won't 'grow out of', then they are gone. We don't need their money to make the rent. We just train our students, and if they stick it out, they're usually of high moral caliber. We're not Sunday-school teachers by any stretch of the imagination but the training, as most martial artists will attest, complements that sort of behavior.

See right there we agree you will get rid of someone. Because they haven't quit and you decide that they are not worty of the skillset you are teaching. Why because you can't trust them.

I actually knew in the end you would get o making this statement. And as I say you don't want to teach "JUST ANYBODY" everything. So there its out in the open we agree. LOL

And besides I taught your instructor the "Tazmanian-Pinkie-Finger-Lock!" Ski-doosh!

On that note gentlemen, could we leave this thread for it's intended purpose?
Unless you have anything particularly relevant to add?

And on this note we will now move on to something completely different. LOL Sorry couldn't resist.

Sorry just sometimes I get too Lazy to hit the NEW THREAD button, it is sooooo much easier to just hit reply. LOL

See right there we agree you will get rid of someone. Because they haven't quit and you decide that they are not worty of the skillset you are teaching. Why because you can't trust them.
Of course we get rid of people, I said so from the start. For lots of reasons. I'm not making a living from this; I can afford to get rid of people if I want to. But it could well be AFTER they've learned a lot of nasty stuff that they could use the 'wrong' way, if they so desired, just like you and your students. My point was we don't hold anything back from legitimate students of the appropriate age and rank. No 'secret' techniques, reserved only for a few chosen disciples. That's a bunch of hogwash.

Back on track.
Earlier, I posted a chart of the major arteries.
In the forearm, you have two major arteries, the bigger of which is the Radial.
I just had both my radial arteries out (function is taken over by the Ulnar artery), so just imagine that a good cut anywhere across the line of the scar could sever your radial.
Then think back to the nonsense posted in some of the clips already shown.

Good Heavens, Mule!!! Is that YOUR arm???


I agree - many, if not most, of the so-called "knife defenses" taught in many martial arts schools absolutely will not work...

pstarr wrote:
Good Heavens, Mule!!! Is that YOUR arm???

Yes.
The right one isn't quite as pretty.

Following my earlier post that we train knife defences because they are part of the art, rather than their effectiveness.

We trained them last night, and as usual our instructor said if you are in the situation the only real defence is to run.

Anyway we worked the ones we usually do last night, then to show their effectiveness or otherwise we had the knifeman in the centre of a circle and attack us at random. Nobody would have survived without serious injury!

Jeltz wrote:
Following my earlier post that we train knife defences because they are part of the art, rather than their effectiveness.Absolutely.
If there are valid principles to be extracted, rather than simply collecting techniques.

We trained them last night, and as usual our instructor said if you are in the situation the only real defence is to run.

Anyway we worked the ones we usually do last night, then to show their effectiveness or otherwise we had the knifeman in the centre of a circle and attack us at random. Nobody would have survived without serious injury!
Cool.
Hopefully everyone in the class is getting the same message.
The danger comes in when perhaps someone who is taught what you are learning goes on to teach the knife defences as just that.