Thread: A father's Love and Rage

Originally Posted by Matt69

The farmer was quite a controversial case. He shot a fleeing, unarmed, teenage burglar in the back, with an illegally-owned weapon. That certainly gave the prosecution quite a lot to play with. (His name is Tony Martin if you want to google him, I'm sure there's tons of coverage.)

Personally I don't think he should have been jailed - he lived in a very rural area, and he had been repeatedly burgled over the preceding years. The police, when he had called them on previous occasions, had just turned up the day after and given him a crime number. Few of my friends agree with me on this, but I think the state lost its right to a monopoly on violence in Martin's case, because it failed in its side of the deal ("Citizens lose the right to mete out violence/ take the law into their own hands and in return the state uses its monopoly of violence to protect those citizens").

This is one reason why you can not allow the state to have a monopoly on violence. It is funny how they can hold you responsible for violence and then yet the state is hardly responsible for anything.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

This is one reason why you can not allow the state to have a monopoly on violence. It is funny how they can hold you responsible for violence and then yet the state is hardly responsible for anything.

BTW How can any man consider himself a proper father and protector without doing the same.

The State does not have a monopoly on violence. There are others, known as Criminals, who also deal in it perhaps more frequently than the democratically elected State does.

I am all for protecting myself and my loved ones, but I refuse to accept that "protection" and "violence" are synonymous. In addition, there are, I believe, many ways to subdue an individual without in fact killing them. Of course if the individual is armed you may have no choice but to commit extreme violence upon their person but thankfully I also believe those situations are rare.

As an example of what I believe in, the other week my MMA class was learning knife defense. All very "1%" stuff, yet interesting nonetheless. We came to the part where, after securing the wrist, we use the momentum of the attacker's arm to swing the knife hand down and behind their back. On the way through, there's the option to knife them in the ribs with their own weapon - very "poetic justice". After all, this person was swinging a knife at you, right? One of the instructors said "but we don't encourage that any more - who knows why?" The answer, it appears, is that our training makes it easier to be prosecuted, as we are "weapons" (I am more a tool, but that is another story).

Everyone nodded sagely and looked slightly disappointed!! I raised my hand and said "and, morally of course." Everyone stared at me blankly. "Umm, morally we should not be wanting to kill people, right?"

Blank stares.

James.

But a Useful Tool James...Lets not have you think that everybody out there thinks of you as a Useless Tool afterall.


Mick

Originally Posted by Jimbo

The State does not have a monopoly on violence. There are others, known as Criminals, who also deal in it perhaps more frequently than the democratically elected State does.

I am all for protecting myself and my loved ones, but I refuse to accept that "protection" and "violence" are synonymous. In addition, there are, I believe, many ways to subdue an individual without in fact killing them. Of course if the individual is armed you may have no choice but to commit extreme violence upon their person but thankfully I also believe those situations are rare.

As an example of what I believe in, the other week my MMA class was learning knife defense. All very "1%" stuff, yet interesting nonetheless. We came to the part where, after securing the wrist, we use the momentum of the attacker's arm to swing the knife hand down and behind their back. On the way through, there's the option to knife them in the ribs with their own weapon - very "poetic justice". After all, this person was swinging a knife at you, right? One of the instructors said "but we don't encourage that any more - who knows why?" The answer, it appears, is that our training makes it easier to be prosecuted, as we are "weapons" (I am more a tool, but that is another story).

Everyone nodded sagely and looked slightly disappointed!! I raised my hand and said "and, morally of course." Everyone stared at me blankly. "Umm, morally we should not be wanting to kill people, right?"

Blank stares.

James.

Increasing the accountability of those trained in martial arts should be expected. In this particular case, sticking with my opinion, martial artist or (un)lucky strike really makes no difference. The training not only makes one more proficient in causing grave injury, but more proficient in protecting one's self without causing grave injury to the other party. More specifically, in the OP's example, more aware during the fight. If I was on the jury I would let a bit more slide after the person went limp for an untrained individual than a fairly well trained martial artist. Personally I would be a hard sell that you lost control & succumbed to raw adrenaline when you have spent years training for just that sort of situation. Even though the emotion level is higher, I would expect the trained martial artist to be able to rein things in quicker than Joe Sixpack. I would of course exclude something like an army soldier who had seen action and showed PTSD proof. Just a few pennies in the convo.

Love reading this stuff,MMA classes,martial artists,PSTDs,any of you ever been in a real bar fight?
None of the above meens sqautola.You can be Mr. 250 lbs of muscle and Co$ck,trained in the inth degree,you might even be a seals sniper,you square off with me, and I will egg you on,than my buddy will split your head open with a pool que, from where you will never realize.Than you are out for the count.
Human minds do not function during a fit of rage,thats why we have pleas of temporary insanity.
Of course none of the gentlemen on these boards have ever had a spat of insanitys

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.

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

Love reading this stuff,MMA classes,martial artists,PSTDs,any of you ever been in a real bar fight?
None of the above meens sqautola.You can be Mr. 250 lbs of muscle and Co$ck,trained in the inth degree,you might even be a seals sniper,you square off with me, and I will egg you on,than my buddy will split your head open with a pool que, from where you will never realize.Than you are out for the count.
Human minds do not function during a fit of rage,thats why we have pleas of temporary insanity.
Of course none of the gentlemen on these boards have ever had a spat of insanitys

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.

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

.................
Of course none of the gentlemen on these boards have ever had a spat of insanitys

I did,,, the day I got married; thank God the insanity is over.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Everyone nodded sagely and looked slightly disappointed!! I raised my hand and said "and, morally of course." Everyone stared at me blankly. "Umm, morally we should not be wanting to kill people, right?"

Blank stares.

James.

Priceless! I'll have to share this with my sensei.