|
|
Do you think that firearms instruction should be part of combat martial arts training?
|
Yes (if yes why) |
|
86% |
[ 25 ] |
No (if no why not) |
|
13% |
[ 4 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 29 |
|
| Author |
Message |
RichardZ
Brown Belt
Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 624
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:37 pm Post subject: Re: Use of firearms |
 |
|
| USCMAAI wrote: |
| In my system we require firearms training (weapons use, handgun retention, tactical use of a firearm). I am curious as to how many other instructors train students in the use of firearms. |
There is a martial art that uses firearms: Hojutsu Ryu
If one is to be skilled in combat, which martial arts have been re-evolving per each passing era, one should become familiar with current weapons of any type readily avialable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bushido_man96
KF Sensei
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 30188
Location: Hays, KS
Styles: Taekwondo, Combat Hapkido, Aikido, GRACIE, Police Krav Maga, SPEAR
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tufrthanu wrote: |
| What do you do as part of your rambo drills? |
They are a group of drills, but they start out with each having a weapon, knife, gun, or stick. You put your hands out in front, like a fence, and go hand to hand with the partner. One breaks contact, and then it is a race to see who draws. From their, you work different strategies to get the upper hand.
_________________
www.haysgym.com
http://www.sunyis.com/
www.aikidoofnorthwestkansas.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RichardZ
Brown Belt
Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 624
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It was once argued that a man with a knife can beat a man with a gun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuma
Black Belt
Joined: 03 Dec 2008
Posts: 1092
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Depending on the conditions, a guy with a sock full of quarters could beat a guy with a bazooka. There's way too many variables to say one will always or almost always beat the other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RichardZ
Brown Belt
Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 624
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know. It was one of those arguments strated by blade lovers which were anti-gun people as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bushido_man96
KF Sensei
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 30188
Location: Hays, KS
Styles: Taekwondo, Combat Hapkido, Aikido, GRACIE, Police Krav Maga, SPEAR
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RichardZ
Brown Belt
Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 624
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bushido_man96 wrote: |
| That stems from that 21 foot rule, but the dynamics change when both have weapons drawn. |
Indeed. The guy with the blade would have to still have his drawn first. It is all situational.
it is the same as guy on the outside of his car and gun or knofe inside.
It is all a matter how the weapon is reachable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slag
White Belt
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Posts: 2
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great thread.
While many in here started with MA before firearms, I am just the opposite. I have carried a gun professionally for a good part of the last 10 years (Army and city Police.) I also lawfully concealed carry every day.
My Glock is my primary self defense tool. MA are just a back up or an alternate for me. A few scenarios:
Surprise attack: If you didn't see the attack coming it could be difficult to draw your weapon. Drawing while fighting on the ground could be a deadly mistake. MA's gives me the ability to fight off the initial attack, break contact, retreat or draw my weapon.
Law: There are times when self defense is necessary, but lethal force may not be justified. An unarmed attacker, similar in size to yourself, does not immediately rank that high on the force continuum.
No weapons allowed: There are places where we cannot carry with a CHL. Yes, even in Texas  If I am going to an anti-gun establishment, I just leave the pistol in the car. If I am going to have ANY alcohol at all, then the pistol is left at home. I would have to rely on unarmed combat.
Weapon is inoperable: Whether out of bullets or the pistol blows up in your hand. If you are in a serious enough fight that you have run out of bullets and the battle isn't over, then I wish you the best of luck. I am not the quitting type and would keep on fighting. MA may give me the slight advantage necessary to escape alive.
I do not believe that firearm training should be compulsory, but it should be an option. Make it mandatory and you will have a few clueless instructors giving out bad information because they are ignorant or do not care. Most would find it difficult to teach something that they do not believe in. Finding a good firearms instructor is just as difficult/important as finding the right MA instructor. Make it an option for those who realize that training with a firearm may save your life, and can also be a lot of fun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JusticeZero
Black Belt
Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 2166
Location: AK
Styles: Capoeira Angola
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RichardZ wrote: |
| bushido_man96 wrote: |
| That stems from that 21 foot rule, but the dynamics change when both have weapons drawn. |
Indeed. The guy with the blade would have to still have his drawn first. It is all situational |
In the situation that the '21 foot rule' was tested in, the knife wielder did NOT have the knife drawn at the moment of attack. The knife was drawn, and not from a good sheath, as they closed range. The situation was also however a demonstration of attack vs. response, and the main lesson, I feel, was to notify gun fans that a ranged weapon is not to be considered a panacea in situations involving moderate range.
I would furthermore consider a gun not to be considered a panacea under any circumstances; I am told (I cannot verify this personally) that during a significant portion of the year, 10mm handguns are ineffective in my state; certain common types of typical winter clothing is sufficient to stop the bullets. Handguns are hardly a case of 'you fall over now' at best in any case; neither is a blade.
_________________
"Anything worth doing is worth doing badly." - Baleia |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RichardZ
Brown Belt
Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 624
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JusticeZero wrote: |
In the situation that the '21 foot rule' was tested in, the knife wielder did NOT have the knife drawn at the moment of attack. The knife was drawn, and not from a good sheath, as they closed range. The situation was also however a demonstration of attack vs. response, and the main lesson, I feel, was to notify gun fans that a ranged weapon is not to be considered a panacea in situations involving moderate range.
I would furthermore consider a gun not to be considered a panacea under any circumstances; I am told (I cannot verify this personally) that during a significant portion of the year, 10mm handguns are ineffective in my state; certain common types of typical winter clothing is sufficient to stop the bullets. Handguns are hardly a case of 'you fall over now' at best in any case; neither is a blade. |
A drawn knife like a drawn gun depends on the person and the holster-shealth.
I dont know where you get your information, or why you choose to use a 10mm as an example, but a bullet will penetrate winter clothing, unless this clothing had kelvar panels or something.
Handguns are a better defense than a blade.
Attack verses response: I know a few LEO who actually got what is call "the drop" on knife wielder, cudgel wieders, etc., |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
on the post.
