winning a fight. a physical fight.

[Campbell]

No, you'll lose. And with that attitude it'll just fuck you up for longer when you do. Provided you don't instigate anything, you won't have been ramping up to it, will be caught largely unawares, and will be confused by the meaningless violence on your person for long enough not to be in any state to fight back when they've finished pounding your head off the nearest shuttered shopfront

[MJC]

http://www.howmanyfiveyearoldscouldyoutakeinafight.com/

[novium]

obviously it is a far better thing to let yourself be raped and put your trust in the justice system (with a conviction rate of 5%) than risk harming a poor defenseless rapist.

Quoting fluffy from 19:20, 14th Dec 2007
So you would advocate... what? Letting yourself be raped?
Don't you dare fucking insult my mother.

[hr]

dev ksereis, alla eimai trella erotebmevei mazi sou..

[hr]

Neither the storms of crisis, nor the breezes of ambition could ever divert him, either by hope or by fear, from the course that he had chosen

[Al]

Quoting novium from 07:02, 18th Dec 2007
obviously it is a far better thing to let yourself be raped and put your trust in the justice system (with a conviction rate of 5%) than risk harming a poor defenseless rapist.

I can only surmise that you are being deliberately obtuse. No one has said that people cannot defend themselves if they are being attacked. The point being made was that people are not allowed to carry items to use as weapons just because they think they might be attacked. And it is true that the police or prosecuting authorities would take a dim view of someone who claimed they were acting in self-defence but had the time to hunt around for something that could be used as a weapon.

[Mr_Big_Dave]

Quoting Al from 11:09, 18th Dec 2007

Quoting novium from 07:02, 18th Dec 2007
obviously it is a far better thing to let yourself be raped and put your trust in the justice system (with a conviction rate of 5%) than risk harming a poor defenseless rapist.

I can only surmise that you are being deliberately obtuse. No one has said that people cannot defend themselves if they are being attacked. The point being made was that people are not allowed to carry items to use as weapons just because they think they might be attacked. And it is true that the police or prosecuting authorities would take a dim view of someone who claimed they were acting in self-defence but had the time to hunt around for something that could be used as a weapon.

During the attack she could pick up anything that comes to hand and use it as a weapon, as long as it can be shown to be reasonable.

[Al]

Of course. But that is not what the person who first brought up the use of weapons said.

[rob 'f*ck off' wine boy]

Avoid them. Read Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War'.

[Cain]

Quoting rob 'f*ck off' wine boy from 14:53, 19th Dec 2007
Avoid them. Read Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War'.

Exactly; if you're sitting at home reading The Art of War, you won't get into so many fights.

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[Grant]

This is a hilarious thread.

"The morality of fighting" - seriously - if someone starts anything, they deserve what they get.

I'm not entirely sure what would be good advice - taking a martial art will only help after you've studied it long enough to do it without thinking, and telling you certain areas to attack is no good as you'll likely spend so much time going for the eye that you'll get your head kicked in.

My "advice" is simply not to look like a victim: stand tall, look aggressive and strike hard and fast if provoked. Dont look lost, walk with purpose.

i always got told to hit back twice as hard, twice as often. That seems to work, and they tend to think twice about starting again. Fuck any suggestion of morals - they wont help you if someone fractures youre skull.

Try to read the situation - sometimes walking is the best option - other times, its best to attack. Why let them hit you first? Unless you plan on loitering for the police, hit them first, it reduces your risk of injury.

[Mr_Big_Dave]

Quoting Grant from 15:08, 21st Dec 2007
Why let them hit you first? Unless you plan on loitering for the police, hit them first, it reduces your risk of injury.

Completely fucking useless advice.

1) you get charged with assault
2) the guy that started this thread obviously couldn't fight sleep
3) unless you knock the person out, you're going to get the shit kicked into you.

Just becuase you play a lot of computer games and have read about fighting on wikipedia doesn't mean you know anything.

(this is where you respond by claiming to be a black belt in 12 different martial arts, won 120 out of 120 fights, being the hardest person at your high school and at least one of your parents attended a self defence class)

[FightingTalk]

It's so obvious that fuck-all people here have ever been in a fight.

And flossy and Grant are a pair of tits. Disregard their advice because it's espoused by feckless twats.

[Grant]

Quoting FightingTalk from 23:24, 28th Dec 2007
It's so obvious that fuck-all people here have ever been in a fight.

And flossy and Grant are a pair of tits. Disregard their advice because it's espoused by feckless twats.

Who is

Well, tbh dude, at least i can reveal who i am.

I dont really care either way. I've had fights, and i won them. I've een started on by a group, and i won that. I've never been charged with assualt.

Take it or leave it. If i find out who this is, we'll see how resolutley you stand up to your words offline.

It pisses me off how many people think they are 50ft tall online, then cower like children offline.

[flossy]

Quoting FightingTalk from 23:24, 28th Dec 2007
It's so obvious that fuck-all people here have ever been in a fight.

And flossy and Grant are a pair of tits. Disregard their advice because it's espoused by feckless twats.

Fairly bemused by this - I haven't posted on this thread. FLUFFY on the other hand has. Whether you think I'm feckless or Fluffy is, at least both of us can read...

[hr]

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the substrate.

[LonelyPilgrim]

Quoting Al from 11:09, 18th Dec 2007

Quoting novium from 07:02, 18th Dec 2007
obviously it is a far better thing to let yourself be raped and put your trust in the justice system (with a conviction rate of 5%) than risk harming a poor defenseless rapist.

I can only surmise that you are being deliberately obtuse. No one has said that people cannot defend themselves if they are being attacked. The point being made was that people are not allowed to carry items to use as weapons just because they think they might be attacked. And it is true that the police or prosecuting authorities would take a dim view of someone who claimed they were acting in self-defence but had the time to hunt around for something that could be used as a weapon.

It is blatantly obvious at this point that a) you've never been in a fight and b) you don't take the possibility seriously. You probably walk around feeling perfectly safe and secure, totally unaware of your surroundings and the potential danger they hold, just like 99% of the Western world.

On one occassion I was assaulted by a chap on a BMX bike. He attempted to run over me (which had I not dodged, probably would have severely hurt both of us, the idiot). He then prepared for another pass. I clearly can't outrun a motorbike, and yet I did have a few moments to pick up a fallen tree limb (we being on a country road) with which I quite ruined his day, and bike.

The point is, if you are aware of your surroundings, keep a clear head, and are lucky, it is just possible that you can and will have time to pick up a potential weapon. And by 'potential weapon' I mean just about anything will do, with the right mindset.

Of course you should run away if you can, but if you are surrounded, or they are faster, or you are already too injured to run then you do what you have to do to survive. There is no choice there, chap. One doesn't think, "Well, I could defend myself and maybe survive, or I could follow the law... guess I'll obey the civil authority and die."

Oh, and your self-defense laws in the UK are a piece of shit, incidentally.

[hr]

Arma virumque cano...

[Al]

Lord, give me strength. I cannot understand how people who are apparently intelligent enough to get into university can be so stupid that they completely fail to grasp the point. There is a world of difference between defending yourself - using a weapon or not - when you are being attacked, and the advice that you and others are giving. Namely, arm yourself if you have the slightest worry that you may be attacked. The law quite rightly takes a dim view of that. If you have time to hunt for a weapon then you have time to remove yourself from danger. And that is the point behind self-defence. It is to allow a person to get away. You can't continue to put the boot in and then claim to be acting in self-defence.

[LonelyPilgrim]

Quoting Al from 11:39, 7th Jan 2008
Lord, give me strength. I cannot understand how people who are apparently intelligent enough to get into university can be so stupid that they completely fail to grasp the point. There is a world of difference between defending yourself - using a weapon or not - when you are being attacked, and the advice that you and others are giving. Namely, arm yourself if you have the slightest worry that you may be attacked. The law quite rightly takes a dim view of that. If you have time to hunt for a weapon then you have time to remove yourself from danger. And that is the point behind self-defence. It is to allow a person to get away. You can't continue to put the boot in and then claim to be acting in self-defence.

No one is advocating beating a person who is down. I, certainly, am not advocating carrying a weapon around (although I do appreciate living in a legal climate that permits such things, properly licensed). However, you are simply wrong in your belief that if there is time to pick up an impromptu weapon then there is alternatively time to run away. Sometimes, that thinking will be correct, in which case running away is the smartest thing to do.

Other times, it simply doesn't track with reality: it is a false syllogism. Situations in which your thinking does not apply include, but are not limited to:

1. Situations where retreat is not possible, ie. backed into a corner/alley/room etc

2. Situations where a potential weapon is immediately to hand in the environment - no 'hunt'ing necessary

3. Situations were the attacker is obviously faster than oneself, such that running away would be pointless

4. Situations in which one needs to defend a third party who can not run away, for whatever reason

5. Situations where one is surrounded, and cut off from retreat.

I am not a violent person, by nature. I have, however, by experience been forced to concede that there are times when violence is necessary as a tool of last resort. Of the situations presented above I have found myself in #3, #4, and #5. In two of those cases, not having to fight barehanded probably saved my life. L

et's just consider #4 for a moment, shall we? Some years ago I went out walking at night, in a woods. I took a walking stick along as is my custom, in order to help with my footing. I came across a man attempting to rape a friend of mine. After recovering from the momentary shock, I employed my walking stick as a weapon until she had a chance to make her escape. Should I have not done so? Ought I to have run away and left her to her fate? It seems, from your reasoning, that I ought to have done just that: a prescription I simply cannot accept.

My story is improbable, but it is also true. We live in an improbable world. It is my contention that a responsible adult needs to be mentally prepared to deal with the improbable no matter how much he or she may wish to never have to.

To the original poster, if he's still following this, I would give this advice: It's all well and good learning how to fight, but if it can be avoided, avoid it. Even winning a fight hurts; it can hurt quite a lot, even kill you. Hollywood glorifies violence and downplays the consequences. In the real world, knife and gun fights quite often end up with both parties very dead. Even fistfights kill people or leave them very severely injured. Violence is a tool, not a plaything, and it should be used only under extreme circumstances, and even then with regret and great caution.

[hr]

Self-control is the chief element of self-respect; self-respect is the chief element of courage. - Thucydides

[Al]

As we're just going 'round and 'round, I'm stopping now.

[David]

Quoting LonelyPilgrim from 06:12, 7th Jan 2008
Oh, and your self-defense laws in the UK are a piece of shit, incidentally.

Just because we don't have your shitty 'right to bear arms' you arrogant little yank? Yeah, I'm sure your country does things better too, how many times have I heard this from arrogant Americans such as yourself. Woo, lets grab myself a gun..oh wait, woe is me, I'm having a bad day, lets go wipe out some classes, Virginia tech style!

'kin Americans..bunch of patronising, arrogant smug fascist bastards.