Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:48:22 +0200 From: eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: Eskrima digest, Vol 16 #154 - 2 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Eskrima-FMA discussion forum, the premier FMA forum on the Internet. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Status: O 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 1994-2009: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Filipino Martial Arts. 2700 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 digest at http://MartialArtsResource.com Mabuhay ang eskrima! Today's Topics: 1. Re: Weapons and legislation (and fruit) (iPat) 2. Re: Weapons and legislation (and fruit) (jhfischer@fuse.net) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:42:56 +0100 Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Weapons and legislation (and fruit) From: iPat To: jhfischer@fuse.net Cc: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:17 AM, wrote: > -Hi back iPat , >                   sleeping with out commando clothing is my back up plan. >    If I were to have a malfunction ,I could always make them laugh into submission .:o) > >  I agree with you a 100 percent on developing observation skills . > what techniques have you developed or trained in to enhance this very important skill ? We, at first, encourage Commentary Walking - a technique taken from advanced driving. You talk your way around and observe everything, saying aloud in your head what you can see and identify potential risks. After a while this will become habit and the participent has a better awareness of their environment. > >   Could not your S.O.P. be to carry your firearm all the time to mitigate your risk ? Could be, but its not a catch all. We dont carry guns here so it isnt part of that equation. >    I’m not advocating that just being armed is enough.To be armed and trained is the objective .That is like saying just because I have a race car ....I’m a race car driver. Also as I stated ,I don’t think that it is the government right to interject  there interpretation of the second amendment right as they see fit . Cant/wont comment on your laws. Thats your business, but otherwise i agree. > >  You said that "simple allowing people to be armed that they are not aware of the consequences. Who is alowing this ? It should be your right ....in any country you live in . That is your values not mine. Every culture will look at it from a different viewpoint and not one is totally right. You have to be able to be flexible to adapt to the requirements. >In the USA to carry a firearm on your person in public it is required to have a background check and basic firearm instruction ,I will admit its not B.U.D.'s training and basic in nature ....never  the less its training As far as looking at a hospital you could say the same thing about the car wreck analogy I gave earlier sure there are far more injury's in car wrecks than firearms .People aren’t aware of getting in a car and not wearing a seat belt will kill you ,but they do it any way . Many young people drive a car thinking they are capable and when they go to fast in the wrong place they crash. Older men returning to motorcycles think they can deal with it but that age group has the highest accident rate. Simply having armed and trained people doesnt mean that it answers their situation. Some of those people will freeze when it really happens and their weapon will be used against them. Ask a military or law enforcement officer on here, these guys will have seen it for real. I know of people who have had the SOP training and who have dealt with a risk very concisely with a firearm. But what works for one will work for others is the wrong approach imho. >                     You said that most violence acures in young men between the age of 15 and 25 and that you disagree with arming  people because people is such a broad term .I guess my view point is different on that to .I haven’t seen any age difference in violent activities and as far as arming people ,how is that to broad of a term .I could state case after case of young children  coming to the rescue of their mothers and 87 year old grandmothers holding a home invader at gun point  until the police arived.So ....I ask you again who is to say who can and cannot  arm themselves....you ,the government .....any government. How much training do you think these people had ?THe answer is probably not that much ,but they had the choice to arm themselves and exercised that right .....and that is the difference  sir. If you want to use examples then you need to also include the negatives. Including extremes where kids have taken their parents firearms and shot up people in the local school. Its not a complete argument and its not my desire to discuss gun issues. look at this 94 study i googled: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/ecv.txt. it says that "Persons between the ages of 12 and 24 have the highest victimization rates for all types of crime, while those age 65 or older have the lowest." "The violent crime rate is nearly 16 times higher for persons under age 25 than for persons over 65 (64.6 versus 4 victimizations per 1,000 persons in each age group). The rate for robbery, one of the crimes of violence, for those under 25 is nearly 6 times higher than for those age 65 or older. *According to the FBI, 5% of the murder victims in 1992 were age 65 or older. *Just as for personal crime victimizations, persons over the age of 65 are significantly less likely to become victims of all forms of household crime than younger age groups. *Personal larceny with contact (purse snatching and pocket picking) is an exception. Those who are 65 or older were about as likely as those under age 65 to be victims of personal larceny with contact." Get this clear, I'm not advocating that you cant arm yourself, just that as a catch all solution its naiive to think this is the best and only way. Domestic violence will be high up there. You think the spouse will not be aware of the gun in the house? > >  If I have miss understood statements in your post then I respectful apologize .I do not know UK laws and do not profess to be a scholar at all US law either .How ever I to bite at the bit when I hear what I think to be a infringement on my constitutional  rights  and statement made to that accord.I guess lets agree to disagree ....Hell I may even come visit you guys over there someday ;) You are always welcome, but Uk laws will be as different as Brazilian laws are to the US. Thats a richness in our world. So I simply look at the common denominator that will work in all situations and allow the student to be able to be flexible to fit into the relevant countries requirements. Just come on the news: We have the lowest number of homicides in England and Wales for many many years, which is attributed to a big campaign against Domestic Violence. > --- iPat wrote: -- Pat Davies www.amag.org.uk http://twitter.com/ipat23 --__--__-- Message: 2 Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:26:58 -0400 From: To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Weapons and legislation (and fruit) Cc: iPat Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net --Hey Pat that is a very similar concept to protection detail training that I have trained in . I like your concept alot . I posted earlier that I’m not any kind of scholar, but you are telling me that you guys aren’t aloud to carry guns in the UK?......WOW! I guess I didn’t understand all of the caution in your tone about firearms....now I do . If you haven’t been exposed to them on a regular basis I can see were you would be apprehensive about them . I guess I was fortunate enough to have a modern day Warrior for a father and it was ingrain in me at a young age that firearms are tools just like a hammer or your piece of "fruit " you were talking about in your first post .Getting your own gun when you were a boy meant that you were growing up and ready to take on reasonability ...at least in my culture ,in my family . It also meant that you had demonstrated that you had sense enough not to do something stupid with it to as you mentioned later on in your last post about children shooting other students in schools . I would say that as I observe alot of cultures as whole there is a loss of the warrior mind set among younger people in this day and age .Which I believe contributes to more firearm accidents than there should be happening as well as the hyper violent crimes that accur.For young people Lack of training and lack of leadership from a strong male role model is a recipe for disaster in anything that you want to debate about .I think again ,its the lack of the parental involvement , not the firearm that is contributing to the added statistical numbers from these younger people you quoted FBI stats on. I’m sorry if I’m boring you with gun jargon and as you stated earlier your not a gun culture and don’t want to discuss or debate guns.I was just trying to point out the importance of choice and the freedom to have choice and that firearms are not the bad guys as people with liberal points of view sometime have .I wish you no more aggriviation on this unless you care to debate more .We obviously have fundamentally different points of view .I will finish by saying that I understand your point and I too believe that the man is the true weapon not the tool as my father has so skillfully educated me in as a young boy .Now I’m a man with a family to raise of my own and will always use a firearm as a first line of defense but also realize that I’m carrying a hammer....and not everything is a nail .which is why I will continually train in FMA combatives because they are of simular aplication in firearms as well as eged and impact weapons ......take care and God bless America ,maybe America truly is the last great warrior culture. STAY AND CHECK 360 JOHN -- iPat wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:17 AM, wrote: > > -Hi back iPat , > >                   sleeping with out commando clothing is my back up plan. > >    If I were to have a malfunction ,I could always make them laugh into > submission .:o) > > > >  I agree with you a 100 percent on developing observation skills . > > what techniques have you developed or trained in to enhance this very > important skill ? > > We, at first, encourage Commentary Walking - a technique taken from > advanced driving. You talk your way around and observe everything, > saying aloud in your head what you can see and identify potential > risks. After a while this will become habit and the participent has a > better awareness of their environment. > > > > >   Could not your S.O.P. be to carry your firearm all the time to mitigate > your risk ? > > Could be, but its not a catch all. We dont carry guns here so it isnt > part of that equation. > > >    I’m not advocating that just being armed is enough.To be armed and > trained is the objective .That is like saying just because I have a race car > ....I’m a race car driver. Also as I stated ,I don’t think that it is the > government right to interject  there interpretation of the second amendment > right as they see fit . > > Cant/wont comment on your laws. Thats your business, but otherwise i agree. > > > >  You said that "simple allowing people to be armed that they are not aware > of the consequences. Who is alowing this ? It should be your right ....in any > country you live in . > > That is your values not mine. Every culture will look at it from a > different viewpoint and not one is totally right. You have to be able > to be flexible to adapt to the requirements. > > >In the USA to carry a firearm on your person in public it is required to have > a background check and basic firearm instruction ,I will admit its not > B.U.D.'s training and basic in nature ....never  the less its training As far > as looking at a hospital you could say the same thing about the car wreck > analogy I gave earlier sure there are far more injury's in car wrecks than > firearms .People aren’t aware of getting in a car and not wearing a seat belt > will kill you ,but they do it any way . > > Many young people drive a car thinking they are capable and when they > go to fast in the wrong place they crash. Older men returning to > motorcycles think they can deal with it but that age group has the > highest accident rate. Simply having armed and trained people doesnt > mean that it answers their situation. Some of those people will freeze > when it really happens and their weapon will be used against them. Ask > a military or law enforcement officer on here, these guys will have > seen it for real. > > I know of people who have had the SOP training and who have dealt with > a risk very concisely with a firearm. But what works for one will work > for others is the wrong approach imho. > > >                     You said that most violence acures in young men between > the age of 15 and 25 and that you disagree with arming  people because people > is such a broad term .I guess my view point is different on that to .I haven’t > seen any age difference in violent activities and as far as arming people ,how > is that to broad of a term .I could state case after case of young children >  coming to the rescue of their mothers and 87 year old grandmothers holding a > home invader at gun point  until the police arived.So ....I ask you again who > is to say who can and cannot  arm themselves....you ,the government .....any > government. How much training do you think these people had ?THe answer is > probably not that much ,but they had the choice to arm themselves and > exercised that right .....and that is the difference  sir. > > If you want to use examples then you need to also include the > negatives. Including extremes where kids have taken their parents > firearms and shot up people in the local school. Its not a complete > argument and its not my desire to discuss gun issues. > > look at this 94 study i googled: > http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/ecv.txt. it says that > > "Persons between the ages of 12 and 24 have the highest victimization > rates for all types of crime, while those age 65 or older have the > lowest." > > "The violent crime rate is nearly 16 times higher for persons under > age 25 than for persons over 65 (64.6 versus 4 victimizations per > 1,000 persons in each age group). The rate for robbery, one of the > crimes of violence, for those under 25 is nearly 6 times higher than > for those age 65 or older. *According to the FBI, 5% of the murder > victims in 1992 were age 65 or older. *Just as for personal crime > victimizations, persons over the age of 65 are significantly less > likely to become victims of all forms of household crime than younger > age groups. *Personal larceny with contact (purse snatching and pocket > picking) is an exception. Those who are 65 or older were about as > likely as those under age 65 to be victims of personal larceny with > contact." > > Get this clear, I'm not advocating that you cant arm yourself, just > that as a catch all solution its naiive to think this is the best and > only way. > > Domestic violence will be high up there. You think the spouse will not > be aware of the gun in the house? > > > > >  If I have miss understood statements in your post then I respectful > apologize .I do not know UK laws and do not profess to be a scholar at all US > law either .How ever I to bite at the bit when I hear what I think to be a > infringement on my constitutional  rights  and statement made to that accord.I > guess lets agree to disagree ....Hell I may even come visit you guys over > there someday ;) > > You are always welcome, but Uk laws will be as different as Brazilian > laws are to the US. Thats a richness in our world. So I simply look at > the common denominator that will work in all situations and allow the > student to be able to be flexible to fit into the relevant countries > requirements. > > Just come on the news: We have the lowest number of homicides in > England and Wales for many many years, which is attributed to a big > campaign against Domestic Violence. > > > > --- iPat wrote: > > > -- > Pat Davies > www.amag.org.uk > http://twitter.com/ipat23 > _______________________________________________ > Eskrima mailing list, 2,700 members > Eskrima@martialartsresource.net > Copyright 1994-2009: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource > Standard disclaimers apply > Subscribe or Unsubscribe: http://eskrima-fma.net --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list Eskrima@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima Subscribe or Unsubscribe: http://eskrima-fma.net Old digest issues @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com/pub/eskrima Copyright 1994-2009: Ray Terry, MartialArtsResource.com, Sudlud.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of Eskrima Digest