Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:19:03 -0800 From: eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: Eskrima digest, Vol 11 #12 - 5 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0.13.cisto1 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Errors-To: eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net X-BeenThere: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13.cisto1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Subscribed-Address: fma@martialartsresource.com List-Id: Eskrima-FMA discussion forum, the premier FMA forum on the Internet. List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: Send Eskrima mailing list submissions to eskrima@martialartsresource.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net You can reach the person managing the list at eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Eskrima digest..." <<---- The Sudlud-Inayan Eskrima/Kali/Arnis/FMA mailing list ---->> Serving the Internet since June 1994. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Filipino Martial Arts. 1800 members. Provided in memory of Mangisursuro Michael G. Inay (1944-2000). See the Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of the Eskrima/FMA list at http://MartialArtsResource.com Mabuhay ang eskrima! Today's Topics: 1. Re: Doce Pares associations (Ray Terry) 2. Re: Re: Friday's Provocation (Phil Elmore) 3. WEKAF style headgear (geezer883@juno.com) 4. Re: Re: Friday's Provocation (Steve Ames) 5. Re: Re: Friday's Provocation (Phil Elmore) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Doce Pares associations To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:14:46 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > I was trying to find some information about Doce Pares, having talked to > my instructor about going over there sometime soon. However, I found > references to both Dionisio Canete's Doce Pares International and Cacoy > Canete's Doce Pares Federation. Both orgs exist. Cacoy is the uncle of and an instructor to Diony. I'm sure that Diony is a fine instructor and organizational leader, but Cacoy is the fighter of the family. Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 2 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:23:40 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Elmore Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Re: Friday's Provocation To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net The presence of firearms does not *create* paranoia. The ownership of a weapon does not automatically transform the owner into a bloodthirsty Rambophile bent on blowing away the neighbors -- any more than the presence of edged weapons and sticks makes the owner want to stab or bludgeon his fellows. Weapons are tools, possessing neither volition nor intent. Only human beings are capable of action and only human *actions* can be evaluated as moral or immoral. Either we view our fellow human beings' freedom of action as a benefit within a free society, knowing that we too enjoy the same freedoms of action (to defend ourselves, to read the literature of our choosing, etc.) -- or we view another man's freedom of action as a *threat* that must be *controlled*. "Martial" artists should *know better* because they *train to deliver force*. That was the thesis of my article in MartialTalk magazine (which is worth a subscription, if you're wondering -- they even package it with The Martialist). Phil Buz Grover wrote: Ste O writes: > I feel that in any society where any tom dick or harriet can carry a > cassull 454, doesn't that lead to a society of further paranoia and > need for gun ownership? I'm not so sure about the paranoia stuff, but all the people listing toward their carry side hip because they're packing some monster .454 would sure make a lot of chiropractors happy. As that may be, the .454 argument is something of a straw man. The fact is that in US "shall issue" concealed carry states folks don't flock to strap on the biggest piece of ironmongery money can buy. Rather, if memory serves, somewhere between 3 and 5 percent of eligible, law abiding, citizens obtain a carry permit. My guess is that most don't carry 24/7 and I imagine most, with apologies to Dirty Harry, don a firearm that carries easily and conceals well. That 3 to 5 percent of eligible citizens who occasionally carry firearms, however, have a dramatic impact on crime in the US. Every state that has passed a "shall issue" law has seen a drop in violent crime, and the degree of that drop corresponds significantly with the percentage of the population with permits: the greater the carry percentage, the greater the drop in violent crime. An FMA listserve isn't the place to explore all the ramifications of firearm ownership and concealed carry. Authors Gary Kleck and John Lott have each rigorously researched the subject and have both published quite a bit about it. I don't want to imply, moreover, that concealed carry brings nothing but benefits. Though crimes like armed robbery and burglary of occupied dwellings drop, in some places--and for reasons that should be fairly easy to deduce--car theft and burglary of unoccupied dwellings rises. In short any discussion of concealed carry involves numerous variables, benefits, and costs that require more than a couple of paragraphs to convey. I urge anyone interested in the topic to look up the authors mentioned above, and to check out their critics, too. I'd like to also suggest that Ste O got causality reversed when mentioning the assault his partner endured. The bad guy who flung the floor cleaner knew full well that there was little likelihood he would encounter an armed victim. Indeed, in the UK someone who resists crime with a firearm is more likely to contend with legal consequences than a fellow flinging floor cleaner. As such the bad guy knew his crude projectile weapon would trump any weapon he probably would encounter. And hey, if he did get shot while committing a crime the British government would pay his legal expenses if he elected to sue the person who shot him. Perhaps if British citizens were allowed to defend themselves with firearms more British criminals would carry guns instead of floor cleaner. But those criminals would also understand that at some point in their vocation they will encounter an armed victim who may well end their predatory ways. My guess is that British criminals would modify their behavior, as have their brethren in US "shall issue" states. I'm also not sure about Ste's statement that crime rose after the UK's comprehensive ban and continued to rise until 2003. The last reporting I read is that gun crime continues to rise in Great Britain, but that the rate of that rise is slowing. Supporters of the ban cite this slower growth as some sort of pyrhic evidence that the ban is working, though my take is victory can't be declared until crime rates drop below the pre-ban level. Everyone can't be committing gun crime all the time so of course at some point the rate of increase will slow, but that's hardly the time to claim your cause is vindicated IMHO. With that said, I want to make it clear that I respect Ste's opinion and understand that guns make a lot of people nervous. I also realize most folks would prefer not to contemplate the possibility of armed confrontation and would just as soon leave the business of confronting armed bad guys to the government and the police. Moreover I understand that a lot of people figure that if there were no guns there would be no gun crime. I think the equation is a lot more complicated than that, but realize most people don't have the desire to sort it out, particularly when so much of the press prefers to present a simple fiction rather than the complex truth. In short I respect people's right to have opinions differing from mine and would defend that right by force of arms if need be. I'd like to suggest, however, that when the government, the press, and right thinking people all start singing from the same hymnal it's probably time to take a hard look at the song. Regards, Buz Grover _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list, 1800 members Eskrima@martialartsresource.net Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource Standard disclaimers apply http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima -------------- - Phil Elmore --__--__-- Message: 3 To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:34:03 -0500 From: geezer883@juno.com Subject: [Eskrima] WEKAF style headgear Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Ladies and Gentlemen, I am interested in buying about 12 WEKAF style head protectors. Can anyone recommend places or people to contact where I can obtain a dozen and get an instructor's discount on the purchase? Any help would be appreciated.. I can be contacted directly at: geezer883@juno.com Thanks, Rob --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:27:31 -0500 From: Steve Ames To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Re: Friday's Provocation Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 09:32:22AM -0500, Buz Grover wrote: > strap on the biggest piece of ironmongery money can buy. Rather, if > memory serves, somewhere between 3 and 5 percent of eligible, law > abiding, citizens obtain a carry permit. My guess is that most don't > carry 24/7 and I imagine most, with apologies to Dirty Harry, don a > firearm that carries easily and conceals well. That 3 to 5 percent of True. I think one of the best benefits of "Brady" was the limitation of magazines to 10. Manufacturers took that to mean "how small of a gun can we make and still fit all 10 bullets". Concealed carry has benefitted from this mindset and modern materials. You can now purchase guns that have a decent clip size (6-10) of a useful caliber (I think that .380 is about the smallest I consider useful, though there is some specialty .32 ammo that works pretty well) that is _TINY_ and weighs next to nothing. I don't know anyone who carries a .454 or even .45. Lots of folks I know carry the Smith .40 (Glock 22). Big guns just don't conceal very well. If the gun isn't comfortable and concealable you aren't as eager to carry it around with you. -Steve --__--__-- Message: 5 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:03:22 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Elmore Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Re: Friday's Provocation To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net More importantly, the mindset that says, "I don't want guns to be legal because I'm afraid anyone I meet could be carrying a great big powerful gun" speaks to irrational fear. Anyone you meet could be carrying a great big powerful gun *now*, illegally or otherwise. And worrying over handguns so powerful they present a very real risk of wrist fracture is just silly -- the size of the bullet doesn't worry me so much as its proximity to my person. Steve Ames wrote:On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 09:32:22AM -0500, Buz Grover wrote: > strap on the biggest piece of ironmongery money can buy. Rather, if > memory serves, somewhere between 3 and 5 percent of eligible, law > abiding, citizens obtain a carry permit. My guess is that most don't > carry 24/7 and I imagine most, with apologies to Dirty Harry, don a > firearm that carries easily and conceals well. That 3 to 5 percent of True. I think one of the best benefits of "Brady" was the limitation of magazines to 10. Manufacturers took that to mean "how small of a gun can we make and still fit all 10 bullets". Concealed carry has benefitted from this mindset and modern materials. You can now purchase guns that have a decent clip size (6-10) of a useful caliber (I think that .380 is about the smallest I consider useful, though there is some specialty .32 ammo that works pretty well) that is _TINY_ and weighs next to nothing. I don't know anyone who carries a .454 or even .45. Lots of folks I know carry the Smith .40 (Glock 22). Big guns just don't conceal very well. If the gun isn't comfortable and concealable you aren't as eager to carry it around with you. -Steve _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list, 1800 members Eskrima@martialartsresource.net Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource Standard disclaimers apply http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima -------------- - Phil Elmore --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list Eskrima@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima http://eskrima-fma.net Old digest issues available @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry, MartialArtsResource.com, Sudlud.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of Eskrima Digest