From: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To: the_dojang-digest@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Subject: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #363 Reply-To: the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Errors-To: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Precedence: The_Dojang-Digest Wed, 21 July 1999 Vol 06 : Num 363 In this issue: the_dojang: Re: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #362 the_dojang: The Games People Play the_dojang: How hardy are the eyes? FW: BOUNCE the_dojang: Non-member submission from ["Krause, John" (fwd) the_dojang: The Sine Wave the_dojang: Congratulations the_dojang: 1999 USTU Junior Olympics the_dojang: Re: Case Law the_dojang: Hapkido MPEGs the_dojang: . ......................................................................... The_Dojang, serving the Internet since June 1994. ~725 members strong! Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, California Taekwondo, Martial Arts Resource Replying to this message will NOT unsubscribe you. To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe the_dojang-digest" (no quotes) in the body of an e-mail (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To send e-mail to this list use the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com See the Korean Martial Arts (KMA) FAQ and online search the last two years worth of digest issues at http://www.MartialArtsResource.com Pil Seung! Ray Terry, PO Box 110841, Campbell, CA 95011 KMA@MartialArtsResource.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: 4karate@bellsouth.net Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:27:20 -0500 Subject: the_dojang: Re: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #362 First, Ignore John. He is full of it. Hey!!!! Well...actually...at the moment....I'm full of spicy cabbage, fried rice, wonton soup, Cho Cho's, Tofu and braised bean and beef. I cooked all these dishes for my grand opening yesterday....and had some left over......so you know I had to be frugal and not let it go to waste. :-P John Hancock ------------------------------ From: 4karate@bellsouth.net Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:28:39 -0500 Subject: the_dojang: The Games People Play OK....serious post this time I'm looking for suggestion on martial art related games for my kids classes. John ------------------------------ From: "Aaron Harmon" Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:43:49 -0700 Subject: the_dojang: How hardy are the eyes? When >teaching the thumbs to the eye move he explained that the eye is a very >hardy organ and you have to make a serious effort to cause permanent >damage. I actually used an eye poke/gouge in real life once "on the street" and other than the guys unbelievably huge response and a nasty black eye, it did not seem to do any long term damage when I looked in on the guy a couple of weeks later. Now of course I do not how his vision was out of that eye afterwards, but he did not take up wearing glasses or anything. I got my index finger at least one knuckle in and twisted it around a little to boot. It seemed more like the damage was more to the surrounding tissue and the eyeball moved out of the way. Also I have very short fingernails. I still think that I over-reacted to the threat and that my response was too dangerous. Most people who were there started to look at me funny after that, very unsettling. Aaron Harmon One is not likely to achieve understanding from the explanation of another. -Takuan Soho ------------------------------ From: "Krause, John" Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:59:49 -0700 Subject: FW: BOUNCE the_dojang: Non-member submission from ["Krause, John" (fwd) Hmmm.... I have been following the discussion on SHIRT grabs. Thanks to the contributors for a very interesting discussion. I am just a yellow belt, so I plead ignorance, but I would appreciate some background. I have seen only little bits of JUDO and Hapkido, so I may not have a full understanding. From what I have seen, a shirt grab can be turned into a choke or a nasty throw very quickly and with little effort. Also (this is where my experience is most lacking), it seems the best (only?) time to counter is when things are still at the level of the grab. After that, it seems you can be in big trouble in short order. For this reason, I would not consider somebody (especially somebody I did not know) grabbing my shirt to be significantly different from that person throwing a punch or kick my way. It is an assault, and that person has taken on the responsibility of that. Is there a particular reason a grab is different? The severity of my response would not really depend on the type of attack. The tactics might, but the severity is different. It seems to me to depend on the situation much more than the form of assault. If the grab were associated with words like "I'm gonna punch you lights out" or "you can kiss your A** goodbye" then personally, I would take that to be threat on my life. If somebody stumbled and grabbed me to gain their balance, I would not respond other than to help them, even though it could be a disguised attack. The appropriate response just seems to depend almost entirely on the situation surrounding the attack. However, if I had ligitimate reason to feel my life were threatened, and peaceful resolution and escape had been ruled out, I would respond and I wouldn't hold back. I have learned one good lesson from starting Hapkido: grabbing or punching somebody can just about be the equivalent of chopping off you arm and handing it to them. At least it could be if somebody was stupid enough to attack my instructor! :-) Finally, I am quite ignorant of laws regarding self defense. I live in Texas. Can somebody fill me in on this? John Krause ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: the_dojang: The Sine Wave Remember our past discussions of the ITF sine wave? Well, now you can see it. Go to the FTP site for our website, www.martialartsresource.com, the Korean side, click on FTP site, and then look for filename Sinewave.mov. There is also a zipped version available. The videoclip is taken, with permission, from the ITF Legacy CD-ROM. It is the first several movements of Do-San. Thanks to Laurie Willox Stewart for permission to post this videoclip so that ya'll can see the sine wave. Much easier than trying to explain it with words. Hopefully more videoclips to follow. Ones of historical interest, a Taek Kyon match, and perhaps some short TKD and/or HKD 'lessons'. Ray Terry raymail@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com ------------------------------ From: Eric Mueller Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:56:44 -0400 Subject: the_dojang: Congratulations Congratulations to my wife, Myong-Suk, who Became a United States Citizen July 9th in Baltimore Maryland, and my son Jason, who became a National Champion Black Belt, July 14th in Las Vegas Nevada. Eric Mueller ------------------------------ From: Gregg London Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 20:50:19 -0400 Subject: the_dojang: 1999 USTU Junior Olympics Good Morning, The 1999 USTU Junior Olympics are over. And as always, I am soliciting your opinions. Complete the On-Line Survey at: http://www.glondon.com/jo99survey.html Thanks in advance, Gregg London - -- Gregg London Consulting Internet/Notes Development http://www.glondon.com Corporate/Trade Show Magic 703-242-7548 Tournament Automation Services ------------------------------ From: Duffbeer@aol.com Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:04:45 EDT Subject: the_dojang: Re: Case Law Tang Soo! Thanks John, for the interesting reply. The case I found: THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. MAXWELL OWUSU, APPELLANT. 99 N.Y. Int. 0080. = ,=20 decided May 13, 1999 =20 " In this case we are called upon to decide whether an individual's teeth ca= n=20 constitute a "dangerous instrument" within the meaning of Penal Law =A7=20 10.00(13). While the use of an object to produce injury is an appropriate=20 analytical vehicle to determine whether an object is dangerous, the statute'= s=20 ordinary meaning, its legislative history and our jurisprudence persuade us=20 that an individual's body part does not constitute an instrument under the=20 statute. " ", in People v Vollmer (299 NY2d 347), this Court held that the defendant=20 could not be found to have used a dangerous instrument under the first degre= e=20 manslaughter statute when he beat a man to death with his bare hands, becaus= e=20 "[w]hen the Legislature talks of a 'dangerous weapon', it means something=20 quite different from the bare fist of an ordinary man * * " "*" ( Id., at 350, citing 1937 N.Y. Law Revision Commission, p. 731; also=20 citing, People v Adamkiewicz and other cases). The People would have us=20 ignore Vollmer (and the historical development of the dangerous instrument=20 concept) on the basis that the 1967 revision of the Penal Law greatly=20 expanded the dangerous instrument concept. As indicated, however, that is=20 simply not the case.=20 Nor can the argument be made that by the "ordinary man" language in Vollmer=20 the Court meant to leave the door open to the possibility that the hands of = a=20 boxer or martial arts expert could constitute dangerous instruments . This=20 would create an interesting anomaly itself, insofar as the defendant in=20 Vollmer beat the victim to death with his "ordinary" hands. An "extraordinar= y=20 man" rule would create increased criminal liability for use of a dangerous=20 instrument where a heavyweight champion merely threatens a blow but not=20 where an ordinary man beats another to death. Vollmer sensibly avoided such = a=20 strained interpretation by concluding fists are not dangerous instruments.=20 This conclusion was reached not because the defendant's fists, as utilized=20 under those circumstances, were not readily capable of causing death (they i= n=20 fact did), but because they were simply his hands, nothing more.=20 In every case where this Court has been called upon to decide whether=20 something constitutes a dangerous instrument, the focus has been on an=20 object. In People v Galvin (65 NY2d 761), for example, the defendant grasped=20 the victim's head and smashed it into a sidewalk, causing severe injuries.=20 The Court held that the sidewalk constituted the dangerous instrument. Thus,=20 our "use-oriented approach" has always been directed at understanding if an=20 instrument is (or can be) " dangerous"; it has not been used as a guide to=20 determine if the means by which the victim was injured was an " instrument".=20 ...and here is the most important part of this case... "If a person is capable of producing a serious physical injury and does so,=20 his criminal liability should be measured by the result (the injury), not th= e=20 potential to do so. To holdotherwise would introduce a potentially confusing=20 array of "relevant" evidence in proving liability under Penal Law =A7 120.05= (2)=20 since a dangerous instrument is defined by its ability to produce a serious=20 physical injury or death in the circumstances in which it is used or=20 threatened, or attempted to be used (Penal Law =A7 10.00[13]). Thus, the siz= e=20 of the perpetrator, his weight, strength, etc., as well as any infirmities o= r=20 frailties of the victim would all be relevant in understanding one's ability=20 to cause serious physical injury or death. A sliding scale of criminal=20 liability (the extraordinary man anomaly) would be the result. While some of=20 the same potential exists in cases involving foreign objects, that decision=20 was made long ago by the Legislature. Our jurisprudence has drawn the line a= t=20 a reasonable interpretation of the term "instrument" and has not included=20 within it a person's hands or other body parts. " I know this is quite different than the cases you found, then again, John- I=20 don't think that they have these kinds of cases in Alaska. Have you ever bee= n=20 in the subways of Manhatten?!! Allison =20 ------------------------------ From: Geoff Booth Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 12:19:18 +1000 Subject: the_dojang: Hapkido MPEGs Aaron thank you for your thoughts on our Mpegs. A quick one for the list if there are any techniques you would like to see on the site let me know and I will do my best to oblige. We could use this as a bit of a survey to see what techniques are more popular. Regards Master Geoff J.Booth PS. I look forward to seeing some of you at Master Wests Seminars in August!! International Hapkido Alliance Australia Hapkido Group http://hapkido.netro.com.au "The art is in the person, all we have to do is bring it out" ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: the_dojang: . ------------------------------ End of The_Dojang-Digest V6 #363 ******************************** Support the USTU by joining today! US Taekwondo Union, 1 Olympic Plaza, Ste 405, Colorado Spgs, CO 80909 719-578-4632 FAX 719-578-4642 ustutkd1@aol.com http://www.ustu.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this digest, the_dojang-digest, send the command: unsubscribe the_dojang-digest -or- unsubscribe the_dojang-digest your.old@address in the BODY of email (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com. Old digest issues are available via ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com, in pub/the_dojang/digests. All digest files have the suffix '.txt' Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, Martial Arts Resource, California Taekwondo Standard disclaimers apply.