A father's Love and Rage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimbo

...As an example of what I believe in, the other week my MMA class was learning knife defense..

---

I used to be a little confused when, as a warm up for our Krav Maga class, we used to practice stabbing people three times across the upper chest, in quick succession from left to right. I always thought it was a little extreme. Bayonet fighting, though, should ALWAYS be used to resolve conflict...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

I used to be a little confused when, as a warm up for our Krav Maga class, we used to practice stabbing people three times across the upper chest, in quick succession from left to right. I always thought it was a little extreme. Bayonet fighting, though, should ALWAYS be used to resolve conflict...

---

It makes perfect sense to do this, in the case of KM. KM was designed to be learned by all Israelis, not just the soldiers. I was told that one of the goals was that ordinary desk jockeys and clerks would learn enough useful skills in a short amount of time to survive the most common scenarios.

One of the big issues was that normal people are not inclined to use extreme violence, and will hesitate or freeze. This has historically always been true for drafted militia men. After WW1, analysis showed that only 18% of the soldiers shot their guns at the other side. Even at point blank range, many people didn't shoot. The reason is that killing is messy business and normal human beings don't have it in their nature. Many rank and file soldiers then were just workers who were given a gun.

Since then, training has gradually changed to include as many realistic exercises as possible. With WW2, the percentage had risen to 40ish. With vietnam it was over 80%. (I have no sources at hand so I could be off on the exact percentages)

Many people would not be able to stab another human being if they suddenly found themselves there without preparation. When adrenalin takes over, you lose virtually all thought processes and you fall back on muscle memory, habits and reflexes. By 'stabbing' a person at the beginning of each and every training session, you make it an automatic action. If you ever find yourself high on adrenalin with a knife in your hands, you will fall back to the things that will come automatically (stabbing) instead of freezing in an extreme scenario that is unfamiliar and unnatural.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grizzley1

I couldn't agree more, sounds like you've been more than one or two as have I. But now that I'm old and broken and put back together I'm going to try and take out the other guy in the three or 4 min that I've got and if past performance is any indicator in my youth I did better than 50% now being old and broken up I'm going to try my best to tilt the odds in my favor. As for the last post I couldn't agree more, I've seen black belts and boxers and bodybuilders alike all get taken apart by seemingly very mild guys but that's just the way things go sometimes, and having a buddy watch your back with a pool cue never hurts. Just my two cents.

---

Well.now that I am all grown up,I never get myself in those situations anymore.
Should an occasion like the days of old present itself ever again (unlikley) I only have two options,Run or hide:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

It makes perfect sense to do this, in the case of KM. KM was designed to be learned by all Israelis, not just the soldiers. I was told that one of the goals was that ordinary desk jockeys and clerks would learn enough useful skills in a short amount of time to survive the most common scenarios.

One of the big issues was that normal people are not inclined to use extreme violence, and will hesitate or freeze. This has historically always been true for drafted militia men. After WW1, analysis showed that only 18% of the soldiers shot their guns at the other side. Even at point blank range, many people didn't shoot. The reason is that killing is messy business and normal human beings don't have it in their nature. Many rank and file soldiers then were just workers who were given a gun.

Since then, training has gradually changed to include as many realistic exercises as possible. With WW2, the percentage had risen to 40ish. With vietnam it was over 80%. (I have no sources at hand so I could be off on the exact percentages)

Many people would not be able to stab another human being if they suddenly found themselves there without preparation. When adrenalin takes over, you lose virtually all thought processes and you fall back on muscle memory, habits and reflexes. By 'stabbing' a person at the beginning of each and every training session, you make it an automatic action. If you ever find yourself high on adrenalin with a knife in your hands, you will fall back to the things that will come automatically (stabbing) instead of freezing in an extreme scenario that is unfamiliar and unnatural.

---

That is very true and it's how Police are trained these days. Doing the same routine over and over again so in a critical situation when your brain shuts down it's the training that you automatically fall back to.

Years ago the California Highway Patrol saw a couple of their guys in a shootout with a bad guy. Both officers were killed and they found that both guys had spent shell casings in their hands and no one could figure out why in the middle of a gunfight these guys were handicapping themselves like this. The answer was, during firearms training they had to police the brass at the end which they didn't like doing so as the training progressed (in the days of revolvers) these guys emptied the brass in their hands and eventually into their pockets and when these guys were in a fight for their lives that is exactly what they did.

From Fox News:

Texas father who beat a man to death for trying to molest his 4-year-old daughter will not be charged, authorities say.

Thats a good thing:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

It makes perfect sense to do this, in the case of KM. KM was designed to be learned by all Israelis, not just the soldiers. I was told that one of the goals was that ordinary desk jockeys and clerks would learn enough useful skills in a short amount of time to survive the most common scenarios.

One of the big issues was that normal people are not inclined to use extreme violence, and will hesitate or freeze. This has historically always been true for drafted militia men. After WW1, analysis showed that only 18% of the soldiers shot their guns at the other side. Even at point blank range, many people didn't shoot. The reason is that killing is messy business and normal human beings don't have it in their nature. Many rank and file soldiers then were just workers who were given a gun.

Since then, training has gradually changed to include as many realistic exercises as possible. With WW2, the percentage had risen to 40ish. With vietnam it was over 80%. (I have no sources at hand so I could be off on the exact percentages)

Many people would not be able to stab another human being if they suddenly found themselves there without preparation. When adrenalin takes over, you lose virtually all thought processes and you fall back on muscle memory, habits and reflexes. By 'stabbing' a person at the beginning of each and every training session, you make it an automatic action. If you ever find yourself high on adrenalin with a knife in your hands, you will fall back to the things that will come automatically (stabbing) instead of freezing in an extreme scenario that is unfamiliar and unnatural.

---

Yeah, you're right. The one thing I liked about Krav Maga is that it builds on 'natural' movements, in stead of forcing you to do unnatural things. It also emphasised de-escalating conflicts, which is handy for where I work (a prison). One think I hated (or at least one thing that scared me) about myself is the tendency for me to go all out in fights and conflict situations. At times, even as a recruit instructor, I had no control at all over myself, and would, even as a child, happily get down to using anything I could (rubbish bins, bricks, my push bike) to hurt people when pushed. It took a lot to get me there, but once there I just 'snapped'. I guess that's true of a lot of people, and for me, I think it links to profound feelings of a lack of self worth as a child and teenager.

These days I have issues with road rage, running people off the road, chasing them for kilometers upong kilometers at extreme speed, SCREAMING at them through my windshield, blocking the road with my car so I could 'explain their driving deficiencies to them'. At 50 I'm starting to mellow a bit, mainly becuause I think my ability to get myself out of a sticky situation is now a lot less than when I was younger. However, I find I have to consciously re-think things like throwing empty beer bottles at cars or swerving in to them. If you're thinking I need help, you're probably right, I seem to have a lot of bottled up anger for some reason...

Oh, BTW, I saw a documentary of 'remote' warfare methods a little while ago, with people piloting drones from the comfort of America. An interestign concept...

Deep breaths Carl... deep breaths. :)

James.

OH MY,somebody got into the cooking Whine tonight:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

When adrenalin takes over, you lose virtually all thought processes and you fall back on muscle memory, habits and reflexes. By 'stabbing' a person at the beginning of each and every training session, you make it an automatic action. If you ever find yourself high on adrenalin with a knife in your hands, you will fall back to the things that will come automatically (stabbing) instead of freezing in an extreme scenario that is unfamiliar and unnatural.

---

And this is why no one ever throws surprise birthday parties for Krav Maga students. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

It makes perfect sense to do this, in the case of KM. KM was designed to be learned by all Israelis, not just the soldiers. I was told that one of the goals was that ordinary desk jockeys and clerks would learn enough useful skills in a short amount of time to survive the most common scenarios.

One of the big issues was that normal people are not inclined to use extreme violence, and will hesitate or freeze. This has historically always been true for drafted militia men. After WW1, analysis showed that only 18% of the soldiers shot their guns at the other side. Even at point blank range, many people didn't shoot. The reason is that killing is messy business and normal human beings don't have it in their nature. Many rank and file soldiers then were just workers who were given a gun.

Since then, training has gradually changed to include as many realistic exercises as possible. With WW2, the percentage had risen to 40ish. With vietnam it was over 80%. (I have no sources at hand so I could be off on the exact percentages)

Many people would not be able to stab another human being if they suddenly found themselves there without preparation. When adrenalin takes over, you lose virtually all thought processes and you fall back on muscle memory, habits and reflexes. By 'stabbing' a person at the beginning of each and every training session, you make it an automatic action. If you ever find yourself high on adrenalin with a knife in your hands, you will fall back to the things that will come automatically (stabbing) instead of freezing in an extreme scenario that is unfamiliar and unnatural.

---

On Killing by Lt. Col Dave Grossman breaks it all down amazingly. Its a terrible science to say the least, but an interesting read non the less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Yeah, you're right. The one thing I liked about Krav Maga is that it builds on 'natural' movements, in stead of forcing you to do unnatural things. It also emphasised de-escalating conflicts, which is handy for where I work (a prison). One think I hated (or at least one thing that scared me) about myself is the tendency for me to go all out in fights and conflict situations. At times, even as a recruit instructor, I had no control at all over myself, and would, even as a child, happily get down to using anything I could (rubbish bins, bricks, my push bike) to hurt people when pushed. It took a lot to get me there, but once there I just 'snapped'. I guess that's true of a lot of people, and for me, I think it links to profound feelings of a lack of self worth as a child and teenager.

---

If I worked in a prison, I'd choose KM as well. I am in traditional Japanese jujutsu and ninjutsu (not the made up flashy kind but the 'boring' actual kind). I love those arts for a combination of reasons, but if I needed to be able to deal with close quarters violence in a fairly short amount time (months instead of years), they would not be my first choice. This is what I tell all new students.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Oh, BTW, I saw a documentary of 'remote' warfare methods a little while ago, with people piloting drones from the comfort of America. An interestign concept...

---

I can't really put words to it, but I hate the concept. When violence comes at no risk to the person committing it, and the person committing it is not confronted with the ugliness, lives become cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

OH MY,somebody got into the cooking Whine tonight:)

---

You don't mean me, do you? I posted that at work, you should see what I do on the wine!

Well, we've already heard what you do with your empty beer bottles while you're driving, so please, tell us what you do on the wine. I'm intrigued...:)


Mick

Was the man justified? Who knows.

Is it understandable? Yes.

Is there a big possibility that I'd do the same in the same circumstances? Yes.

Would I plan out killing the man? No.

Do I feel that the man should be convicted? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LX_Emergency

Was the man justified? Who knows.

Is it understandable? Yes.

Is there a big possibility that I'd do the same in the same circumstances? Yes.

Would I plan out killing the man? No.

Do I feel that the man should be convicted? No.

---

That pretty much sums it up, imo :)

Follow up.

More details have been released.

Apparently the father heard the daughter screaming. He ran up and found the assailant with his pants down. The father attacked the man then called the police asking for help and an ambulance. The police reported that the father was VERY distraught on the 911 tape and after they arrived and had not intended to kill the assailant.

The Grand Jury stated that Texas Law allows deadly force to be used to stop a sexual assault. So that ended it.

That's good for the father and his family. However, with the way the legal system here works, if the slain attacker has any close family members still living, they'll probably sue the father in civil court for wrongful death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReardenSteel

That's good for the father and his family. However, with the way the legal system here works, if the slain attacker has any close family members still living, they'll probably sue the father in civil court for wrongful death.

---

I've heard about this before, with the OJ case.
Could someone please explain this to me?
How can there be 2 lawsuits for the same thing? If the legal court (or whatever it is called) has decided that the man has done nothing wrong, on what basis could a civil court then decide to convict for that same offense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

I've heard about this before, with the OJ case.Could someone please explain this to me?How can there be 2 lawsuits for the same thing? If the legal court (or whatever it is called) has decided that the man has done nothing wrong, on what basis could a civil court then decide to convict for that same offense?

---

Civil courts don't work on the same basis of reasonable doubt that the criminal courts do. For example, you could be tried for Murder 1, but if the prosecution doesn't prove that you fit the definition of Murder 1 beyond reasonable doubt, you would go free. It doesn't mean you didn't commit the crime, you just didn't commit Murder 1 by the definition of the law. This happens all the time here in the US as prosecuters try to over reach instead of going with a slam dunk conviction on lesser charges, i.e. Murder 2, manslaughter or involutary manslaughter. Civil courts, on the other hand, use more of a blanket term such as Wrongful Death to cover the whole range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theseus

Civil courts don't work on the same basis of reasonable doubt that the criminal courts do. For example, you could be tried for Murder 1, but if the prosecution doesn't prove that you fit the definition of Murder 1 beyond reasonable doubt, you would go free. It doesn't mean you didn't commit the crime, you just didn't commit Murder 1 by the definition of the law. This happens all the time here in the US as prosecuters try to over reach instead of going with a slam dunk conviction on lesser charges, i.e. Murder 2, manslaughter or involutary manslaughter. Civil courts, on the other hand, use more of a blanket term such as Wrongful Death to cover the whole range.

---

Ok, but how can multiple courts hold jurisdiction?
Here in Belgium, there is exactly 1 court for everything. What is the point of having overlapping jurisdictions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Ok, but how can multiple courts hold jurisdiction?
Here in Belgium, there is exactly 1 court for everything. What is the point of having overlapping jurisdictions?

---

In criminal court, the state is the plaintiff, and the accused is tried for breaking the law. A jury must be convinced of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt".
In civil court, one party sues the other for damages. A jury decides whether to award damages based on "the preponderance of evidence".

There are other differences, but that's what I remember off the top of my head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MickR

Well, we've already heard what you do with your empty beer bottles while you're driving, so please, tell us what you do on the wine. I'm intrigued...:)


Mick

---

I hang the corks from the brim of my hat and say "That's not a knife, THIS a knife!..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

I hang the corks from the brim of my hat and say "That's not a knife, THIS a knife!..."

---

"That's not a knife, that's a spoon...;):D" You call that a knife? This is a Knife! - YouTube Sorry no offence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

I've heard about this before, with the OJ case.
Could someone please explain this to me?
How can there be 2 lawsuits for the same thing? If the legal court (or whatever it is called) has decided that the man has done nothing wrong, on what basis could a civil court then decide to convict for that same offense?

---

The best way to think about it is there are two distinct systems. criminal and administrative. One has nothing to do with the other. You can be arrested and tried for say killing someone while driving drunk and get off on a technicality but then the family can sue you civilly and you could get big money. It has nothing to do with guilt only you being responsible for causing harm. it's much easier to win in a civil court. Once lawyers get involved the truth doesn't matter much. It's how well the attorney can cajole the jury. In a criminal case it's not so much a case of the state proving the case as it is the defense planting a seed of doubt in just one jurors mind.

Ok even accepting that, if a criminal court gives an absolute 'not guilty', doesn't that also absolve him from the civil consequences?

No,the OJ debacle is a perfect example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EMC45

There is a very good chance he will be "No billed" according to the sherriff. That would be nice. At a club up the road from me a man was punched one time. It killed him. Not hitting his head on the ground or a table. It was one punch and he was dead.

---

Ham Sandwich comes to mind. The Prosecutor can swing this any which way he/she sees fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddafinga

I used to bounce at a club for about three years, I've been in probably over a hundred bar fights. I used my jujitsu in every single one of them.

I agree that your brain doesn't function in a fit of rage. I completely agree with that, I've had that rage before in fact. But... training sort of allows you to remain calm and under control in similar situations because the hostilities are not as frightening our as foreign and your brain knows what to do on autopilot almost through countless repetition.

I still say the father did the right thing and his actions were totally excusable. And I do believe he was in a fit of blind rage.

---

I use the Force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

Well.now that I am all grown up,I never get myself in those situations anymore.
Should an occasion like the days of old present itself ever again (unlikley) I only have two options,Run or hide:)

---

Right behind you!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

That is very true and it's how Police are trained these days. Doing the same routine over and over again so in a critical situation when your brain shuts down it's the training that you automatically fall back to.

Years ago the California Highway Patrol saw a couple of their guys in a shootout with a bad guy. Both officers were killed and they found that both guys had spent shell casings in their hands and no one could figure out why in the middle of a gunfight these guys were handicapping themselves like this. The answer was, during firearms training they had to police the brass at the end which they didn't like doing so as the training progressed (in the days of revolvers) these guys emptied the brass in their hands and eventually into their pockets and when these guys were in a fight for their lives that is exactly what they did.

---

Very sad day for the CHP, they did however cause police training to change .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crotalus

Follow up.

More details have been released.

Apparently the father heard the daughter screaming. He ran up and found the assailant with his pants down. The father attacked the man then called the police asking for help and an ambulance. The police reported that the father was VERY distraught on the 911 tape and after they arrived and had not intended to kill the assailant.

The Grand Jury stated that Texas Law allows deadly force to be used to stop a sexual assault. So that ended it.

---

As do most other state laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Ok even accepting that, if a criminal court gives an absolute 'not guilty', doesn't that also absolve him from the civil consequences?

---

It does not absolve, but normally makes it really really hard. Even more fun, for motor vehicle accidents (and similar things) in the state of Ohio, we have a "No Contest" Plea. It basically allows you to plead guilty because the fine is normally cheaper than actually fighting it and prevents the guilty plea from being used against you in the civil courts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LameBMX

It does not absolve, but normally makes it really really hard. Even more fun, for motor vehicle accidents (and similar things) in the state of Ohio, we have a "No Contest" Plea. It basically allows you to plead guilty because the fine is normally cheaper than actually fighting it and prevents the guilty plea from being used against you in the civil courts.

---

So the injured party can still sue, right? But they can't use the fact that I pleaded guilty in their case? They still have to prove my guilt? I'm a bit confused by your legal system. I like ours here where we just kick people up the arse with a really big boot. We also like to put people in jail if the wildlife gets out of hand and kills their children, esp if they are of a 'weird' religion. You can't sue anyone here, either, it's just not the done thing, but it's legal to fight them in the street; for almost anything. It appears to be OK for the police to bash Aboriginals, too, but it's great that the police can investigate their own cases, and they're very tidy about the whole deal. Isn't law funny?

I think there are only two important things ever written about law. One was Plato's Republic, and the other was Kafka's The Trial.

Yes, the police always do seem to wok things out in their favour don't they?! Soon we'll have in QLD what you already have in SA Carl. Good old 'Anti-Association' laws. Just the thing to infringe on everybodies personal freedoms.


Mick

Yeah. I'm all for stopping gang related violence, in fact I'm all for stopping all violence. And based on that maybe we should enact anti-association laws against the establishment? Maybe against soldiers? Maybe against the Church? Politicians? Teachers? (at least the ones I knew as a kid). I think Kafka said a lot in The Trial that is relevant today with the laws on anti-terrorism (or whatever it is) where one can be held without charge and with no means to communicate. It's EXACTLY what Kafka was writing about; about a person being denied 'access to the law'...

I was thinking today, while gazing up to the very top of Mount Torrens (it's not very far, but that makes it sound cooler) that I'd like to live there on the top, by myself, for a whole decade, as a recluse. After all, I left the army when I became disenfranchised and remote from its (politically forced suck job) agenda in the early 90's (Gulf War time) so why not leave society as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

............
I was thinking today, while gazing up to the very top of Mount Torrens (it's not very far, but that makes it sound cooler) that I'd like to live there on the top, by myself, for a whole decade, as a recluse. ............

---

What are you gonna do when you run out of shaving cream ? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crotalus

Did the father cross the line? Did the molester get what he deserved?

---

No. Yes.

He caught him in the act for goodness sake. No since adding another worthless POS to the prison system and our hard earned tax dollars paying for his acts. I'm just glad this happened in the great State of Texas versus elsewhere.

Now I will read the rest of the thread to other opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I remember a case in the UK where a group of righteous citizenry/self-appointed protectors of the community marched as a group to a man's house, beat down the door and tried to administer community justice.

Such a shame the plaque on the door they so righteously kicked down said "pediatrician".

---

I guess not all pediatricians are pillars of their community. Sickos are all around us unfortunately.

Pediatrician admits possessing more than 100,000 child porn images, videos - U.S. News

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReardenSteel

I guess not all pediatricians are pillars of their community. Sickos are all around us unfortunately.

Pediatrician admits possessing more than 100,000 child porn images, videos - U.S. News

---

That's why you kill them all and let God sort them out. Simple, easy, just!

Call me stupid,I just do not understand all this child porn,pedophyle stuff,i do not understand the sandusky crap.
was this stuff going on 50 yrs ago when I was a Kid?
I feel very bad for Joe Paterno,I do not think, like me,he understood what was going on.
Maybe real men cannot comprehend these things,do not think I ever will:(

I'm not sure it is a new phenomenon. Current research in the area suggests it was just woefully under-reported back in the day compared to now because a lot of it was perpetrated by family members (fathers, brothers, uncles etc), and there were issues of shame etc. Besides which, nowadays there are many more media avenues to distribute this kind of material.

But I agree with you - no human - man, woman, or child - should have to comprehend this stuff. I for one am glad we now flush it out into the open more rather than hide it away in fear and shame. Shine a light into the dark corners, as they say. The more eyes that are open to the issue, the less places there are for the perpetrators to hide.

James.

Yes, it was going on.
Some of it is passed down in a family, from generation to generation. I don't believe that pedophiles suddenly wakes up one morning and says to themselves,"Lets go moleste a child".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I'm not sure it is a new phenomenon. Current research in the area suggests it was just woefully under-reported back in the day compared to now because a lot of it was perpetrated by family members (fathers, brothers, uncles etc), and there were issues of shame etc. Besides which, nowadays there are many more media avenues to distribute this kind of material.

But I agree with you - no human - man, woman, or child - should have to comprehend this stuff. I for one am glad we now flush it out into the open more rather than hide it away in fear and shame. Shine a light into the dark corners, as they say. The more eyes that are open to the issue, the less places there are for the perpetrators to hide.

James.

---

Absolutely !