The Case against Gun Kata

[ViolentMessiah]

some people here have attempted to develop a truly effective gun based martial art, that could perhaps work in the real world.

i admit that i thought it was a worthy endeavor, but after thinking about this subject for some time, now i've come to the conclusion that perhaps it is actually a futile endeavor.

i think a Gun Kata could not work for the following reasons:

1) Gadgets and Gimmicks.

i've read some people talk about things like auto-loaders and mechanisms to place the guns in hand. these things would only contribute to Murphy's Law by just adding unnecessary equipment that could fail eventually in a dangerous situation.

2) Using Guns as Melee Weapons.

guns are projectile weapons. using them for secondary purposes such as melee is just asking for trouble.

first of all, taking the gun out of its holster and changing grips to accomodate it as a clubbing weapon is movement wasted that would be better served by just pulling out a billy club and hitting someone over the head.

someone suggested twirling the gun on your finger to achieve the desired grip. this is suicidal.

the biggest reason why a gun shouldnt be used as a melee weapon is because it increases the likelihood that you will drop it or have it taken away and used againt you.

3) A Gun Kata isnt needed.

this is the main reason why a Gun Kata is just a pipe dream.

any idiot can use a gun to kill someone. no skill is required. there are already tactics for using guns in CQB and those are being used by SWAT and Special Ops in a team effort to accomplish a specific goal.

when would anyone need to use a gun kata? if you have multiple assailants and you take out a gun and shoot one or two of them, the others will most likely haul ass. if you were to continue firing you would probably shoot some of them in the back and your ass would be in jail. no special training needed.

street gangs use guns in "non-traditional" ways. they hold guns using crazy grips, they shoot while running, they actually fire shotguns from the hip, etc.

but guess what? they kill a good number of people. no special training needed.

i guess what i'm trying to say about gun kata is that while it may sound like a good idea, it just isnt feasible in the real world.

put a gun in anyone's hand and if he has the proper mindset he is already a pretty effective killer. just point and shoot. no special training needed.

[GunFu]

Hi ViolentMessiah,

that is basically why we play Gun Sau as a combat sport instead of as a real martial art. On the other hand since I've been interested in this stuff I've been looking around and there are quite a few people who have already invented real handgun martial arts.

GunFu

[Rymel]

way to totally ignore the point of formalizing it into a martial art. anyone can kill with fists or swords or staffs too, so are you saying martial arts are also worthless?

1)the gimmicks are agreeably complicating things, and aren't needed, but to make it a point as to why it wouldn't work is just plain silly. take it all away to just the guns and i'm sure you can figure out a few things that would work past 'just' shooting.

2)since i'm guessing you've read the other threads based on what you've said, why did you not mention using a gun as a melee weapon in its natural position as discussed? the 'spin' as i said it isn't a spin per se, just a slight turn really. not even enough to pull the trigger, and even then only a considerable strike after the clip is empty. or the safety's on. and besides, you seem to forget that once a weapon is drawn, it's kind of hard to switch to another just to do something as simple as beat someone over the head. 'hold on, let me switch to my billy club' just won't work. in which case it's a good idea to know how you can hit people with a firearm, should you need to. as for dropping it and getting it taken away...if you've practiced and sort of martial arts and/or weapons, you probably train to not drop it unless you're left with no other choice anyway. and you're probably trying damn hard NOT to let your weapon be taken away either, whether it be billy club or handgun. and i could be wrong but given the primary nature of a gun i think people would be less inclined to try and grab it from your hand...

3)as i said before, any idiot can kill with any THING. fist, foot, stick, blade, chain, board with a nail in it, all you have to do is use it. but things aren't always that simple. i mean any idiot can 'drive' a car, right? but it takes practice to get good at it, and in particular not kill anyone in the process. so by the same token as what you said martial arts aren't 'needed' either. nor are military training regimens. but obviously it makes them more effective at what they do, be it empty handed or gun in hand.

swat, specops and all other combat-related professions DO have techniques geared towards close quarters firearms combat, but they still boil down to fire and cover. or in the case of law enforcement, disarms. but they're still basic in nature, just like military hand to hand is basic in nature in comparison to martial arts. so why can't firearms techniques be elevated further?

in a cqb situation, people usually don't 'haul ass' if two people on their side get shot. but hey, i could be wrong, and the world could be full of pussies who run at the sight of blood. i mean gang shootouts could just be one guy shot and they all run! really dude... ¬.¬

in regards to who would use it...it's not the point to be a lone man in a firefight. it's to be fully capable of handling yourself in any situation regardless of whether you have support or not, if you have any rounds left, etc, etc. basically anyone who needs to use a gun quickly and effectively would 'use' it, but each would use it differently, according to their needs. law enforcement would benefit, so would military to a degree. civilians could learn improved self defense with it, and hey even gangers could find use for it. it's not a worthless endeavor imho.

i guess what I'M trying to say is, by your logic no training is needed in anything, just give it to them and let them have at it. but that's wrong thinking in any aspect, and i'm sure you can even agree on that. formalizing training can only yield stronger results. and if everyone used things 'only' for what they're meant for we'd never get anywhere. sure a gun was made for shooting, but it's also a 5 pound chunk of metal in your hand, sometimes more. so what happens when it's empty or you're unable to fire? give up? drop it and do hand to hand? just plain pistol whip? you should know how else you can use it, i'd think.

anyone can be a killer. but not everyone can take discipline. and there's more than one kind of discipline. so are you just a killer?

sorry for the long post, but i tend to do these

[ViolentMessiah]

no problem Rymel, i like long posts when you got something real to say.

first of all, any idiot cannot kill with any thing. just because someone has a knife doesnt mean the victim is just going to stand there and let himself get stabbed.

if you give a guy a stick and he attacks someone, the victim can defend himself to some extent because you can see a stick coming. not so wih a bullet.

i can stand across the street and shoot you but if i wanna club you to death i have to get close to you.

another advantage that a gun has is that each bullet is another opportunity to kill. if you have ten bullets you get ten chances to kill someone, so even an idiot can get lucky.

...and yes, if you shoot two or more people in a group surrounding you i seriously doubt that the rest will hang around to see what happens.

as i've said in other posts, i believe that real world experience out-weighs knowledge gained by simply training. does that mean that i think training is useless? not at all.

there are many reasons to train. personally, if i'm training in martial arts its because i wanna be a better fighter. there are those who train for health benefits, inner peace etc. and thats well and good, but i just wanna do what works in the real world.

Rymel you make some good points, even if i disagree with them. i'm not saying you're wrong. i guess its just a matter of perspective but i seriously doubt that a gun kata could be developed that will work on the street. i hope you can prove me wrong, i really do.

[Rymel]

first of all, any idiot cannot kill with any thing. just because someone has a knife doesnt mean the victim is just going to stand there and let himself get stabbed.

if you give a guy a stick and he attacks someone, the victim can defend himself to some extent because you can see a stick coming. not so with a bullet.

that's besides the point man. i said an idiot can kill with anything. whether or not the victim fights back is another matter entirely, unrelated to the original statement, which still holds true. just because you can't 'see' a bullet doesn't mean you can't see it coming. and i'm sure you know how most people dodge bullets. run!

i can stand across the street and shoot you but if i wanna club you to death i have to get close to you.

that's just fluff to validate why a gun is deadlier than a club. it still remains that yes, you can still be an idiot, and still kill with either implement. how you do so is another matter.

another advantage that a gun has is that each bullet is another opportunity to kill. if you have ten bullets you get ten chances to kill someone, so even an idiot can get lucky.

that just means he has say with a full beretta clip, 16 attempts to do so. equivalent to holding 16 throwing knives, or repeatedly bashing someone with a hammer. it still stands to me that once it's empty it's worthless to them, in which case training with it as a melee weapon would change that for the disciplined. i think you're just weighing advantage-disadvantage per weapon instead of seeing the general picture. and if you're going about it that way, of course a gun is deadlier.

...and yes, if you shoot two or more people in a group surrounding you i seriously doubt that the rest will hang around to see what happens.

that's civilians though i'd think. (hardened) gangers, militia, resistance groups, they don't all behave the same. and i could be wrong but most closely knit groups don't take kindly to their own being shot up in a gunfight, and try to return the favor. unless it's insane odds, to which case a lone gunfighter is usually underestimated. or a small squad. either way.

as i've said in other posts, i believe that real world experience out-weighs knowledge gained by simply training. does that mean that i think training is useless? not at all.

there are many reasons to train. personally, if i'm training in martial arts its because i wanna be a better fighter. there are those who train for health benefits, inner peace etc. and thats well and good, but i just wanna do what works in the real world.

i understand that but real world experience can only be strengthened by 'simply training'. and if you go into the real world with this experience in hand, you'll only come out better. however, the reverse usually hurts.

i, too am also of the opinion that real world experience far outweighs straight training, but that's why you need to mix both. a marine doesn't get that good at killing with prior training, and it doesn't get better without real world experience.

there are lots of reasons to train in martial arts, and the ones you named secondly are usually satellite benefits to the primary reason, which is like you said to become a better fighter (although going in for the secondary usually yields the first anyway). but you can't get better if you lack those things. besides, tell me beating the crap out of a punching bag doesn't feel good ;D

you should also keep in mind that seeing how old chinese martial arts are, they don't put crap in that doesn't work. for you it's just a matter of seeing how it works in what situation, and why they chose to do it that way. that's part of the journey of martial arts. or at least kung fu.

Rymel you make some good points, even if i disagree with them. i'm not saying you're wrong. i guess its just a matter of perspective but i seriously doubt that a gun kata could be developed that will work on the street. i hope you can prove me wrong, i really do.

yea, it's probably perspective, hence why i made that new post proposing a different method of doing things, if you haven't seen it yet. but remember that we did say that gun kata in its 'pure' movie form can't work in real life, and maybe you can help us shape it one into something deadly effective. hopefully we'll see you around me and trustkill's threads.

im me sometime, i'd like to chat with you about it.

[Achilles]

you know, when guns were invented they said that thier only use would be for toys and entertainment..... look how far we have come.... I think a gun kata is realisic and nessisary.

[Rymel]

i think it was gibson that wrote "the street finds its own use for things". so let's forgo about what they were intended for and come up with some more uses for it ;D

[Flardladl]

I agree with the thread starter here.

Whilst Gun Kata might be cool and what not, I just can't see it being really effective in real life.

The disarming techniques, whilst they might work in special cases, aren't anywhere near the effectiveness of Krav Maga techniques, thus, pretty much obsolete.

With that, the situations presented in the gun fights seem awfully unrealistic to me.
If there's one person holding a gun shooting at you it doesn't take flash to take him down, it takes cover, better aiming and a healthy dose of good luck to take him down.

If you're pitted against a group of gunslingers, you're done for unless all of them have parkinson, or you run your ass off and they decide not to give chase.
You're done for simply because a single gun can only take out a single person at a time, and you being a single person, can be taken out at any given moment by multiple guns.

Aiming with a gun is not difficult, and figuring out how to shoot it even less so.
Movies are a bit gratuitous with their displays of showing poor aim, whilst in reality it's really easy to hit something with a gun, especially if it's as large as a human torso.

Even whilst moving about in circles might get a few shots to miss you, and in a good day might even allow you to hit someone else, the bigger chance is that you accidentally move yourself in a tight spot, or get shot while you're thinking bullets are being dodged.

Added to all that, aiming a gun is easy ... If you hold the gun the way it's designed to be held.
Arms stretched and the gun properly aligned with your eyes giving those oh-so-convientient little parts on the slide of the gun an actual purpose.
If you hold the gun aligned with one hand aiming already becomes considerably harder, and if you hold the gun in any other way hitting your target will inevitably become more a feat of good luck than of aiming skill.

Some of the poses and moves I've seen don't give me an impression of "wow, this would like, totally save my ass in a gunfight".
Not unless my assailants are wearing a jerk-vest that will pull them back at command of my trigger and some general pointing, wich without a doubt will not be the case.

All in all my verdict on Gun Kata is that it's probably fun to do if you're bored, want to create some pretty awesome scenes on a movie set or are trying to commit suicide whilst giving your assailants something to smile about.

But as an actual combat style, I'd reccomend sticking to Krav Maga for disarming and common sense and cover for longer-range gunfights.

[Gun Taka Sensei]

Now i must totaly disargee with you there Flard...

what exactly are you thinking.
If you look at this movie: www.gunkatta.com/mantisknife.mov

created by Gun Taka specialists, you'd see that something as this: www.kravmaga.nl/clips/kravmaga.wmv

renders krav maga obselete...


Now i want to keep this post short, becouse arguing with people like you is waste of time...


I'd say look at the movies and judge for yourself, so that you don't ever have to mention krav maga again...

ttyl

[Flardladl]

... Normally I never do this, but for now, I wholesomely apologize for what i've said.

I just went and thought Gun Kata to be something I saw in the movies, and mostly aided by wires and everything, but seeing that movie, it showed me that it can actually be done in real life ...

I'm stunned, honestly, sorry for saying Gun Kata wasn't up to the real world ...

[Gun Taka moron]

Another soul saved... ;D

thank god i was here in time...

[observer]

Congrats Sensei, it looks like you blarneyed Flard with one cheesy video.

Please don't assume everyone is quite so gullible, though.

You've supplied a "set" demonstration where the opponent makes only one move with his right hand for Sensei to trap, and lets Sensei execute technique after technique against him.

The opponent also doesn't use his left hand to counter or gut punch Sensei, or grapple Sensei onto the ground when Sensei goes for that badly telegraphed knee strike.

So what does that prove? It sure as heck doesn't prove that "Gun Kata" is up for the real world.

Nope. It proves the same thing it did back in the '60s when the first wave of "Sensei" started doing the same thing, capitalizing on the martial arts craze generated (to a large degree) by Bruce Lee's movies.

It proves any martial arts move looks great when a moderately skilled Sensei has an "uke". It also proves something a lot of martial arts students find out the hard way :

All together now, kids...
Demonstrating a technique against a willing opponent isn't sparring. A "kata" where both participants practice a series of moves isn't sparring, either. Sparring according to a specific style's rules isn't fighting. Fighting doesn't have rules or style.

Oh yeah, annnnnnd... The only thing sillier than bringing a knife to a gunfight is bringing nothing. (unless there's GunKatta banner scrolling across the bottom when it happens).

Flard was essentially right when he said,

"The disarming techniques, whilst they might work in special cases, aren't anywhere near the effectiveness of Krav Maga techniques, thus, pretty much obsolete."

What he didn't add, I will.

Krav Maga is a real, combat proven, martial art (with a ton of weapons disarms and retention techniques) taught to the IDF and police, your own blend of stuff isn't.

Point to Krav Maga.

Flard, pay attention to that Krav Maga video: that's what a real instructor can teach someone vs. the many video "senseis" out there.

Even if you decide to "borrow" a few Krav Maga concepts here 'n there or show a similar kung fu technique and call it Gun Kata, that doesn't negate the effectiveness or the originality of the arts you're borrowing from.

It just shows that you know how to "borrow" from better systems and call it your own.

Good luck on your acting career, btw. You've already shown that a good actor can make an improbable fight sequence seem likely even when it isn't.

Scroll the banner URL,
techno music fade out,
cue the applause track.

[Witcher Wolf]

*slow-claps*

[ViolentMessiah]

damn, the last few posts make me mad i've been away for so long. "observer" whoever you are, You da' man!

[DemonEyedGunman]

You know I must say that the last few people are so funny because they read a book or watch a TV special regarding some stupid moronic opinions about martial arts or gun combat. You try to sound intelligent while stating your opinions, but to the ACTUALLY trained people that were apart of the project you are displayed as being completely ignorant. Especially with observer's post.

You think that Kata is supposed to be combat training? Kata is designed to familiarize yourself and allow you to master the techniques that are used in actual combat. Sparring is the system that is meant to familiarize and awaken you to the feel of true combat, unpredictablity. Next, you completely contradicted yourself by stating, "the only thing sillier than bringing a knife to a gun fight is bringing nothing." Then you talk about the efficient combat system of Krav Maga. Krav Maga teaches alot of gun dissarming techniques that are meant to be used in real combat situations. You then proceed to compliment sensei on being good at borrowing techniques from other systems of combative fighting. Well let me clue you in on something, ALL combat fighting systems are based on techniques stolen from the shaolin temple, the European Knights, and the Samurai. The entire Krav Maga system is stolen from the Chinese Army's boxing routines. As you are probably a 16 year boy who thinks that he can make someone feel stupid and like a simpleton, let me tell you that you suceed in only appearing to be a simpleton yourself. I have been studying Martial Arts for 18+ years now. I have studied a multiple forms of Japanese Bujutsu, Muay Thai, and Krav Maga. I also served 5 years in the military, graduated Sniper School and was Captain of a Spec Ops. Squad in the. What have you done to merit your apparent belief that you are an expert on matters of combat? Multiple people here whom were apart of the original project have military, martial arts, or competition shooting background. Next time you want to make yourself look intelligent, I suggest you actually have something intelligent to say. Also before you want to talk about effectiveness of a particular combat system, I suggest that you first train in that system for a few years and think about the fact that there may be someone else on the world who could beat you unconcious in a matter of seconds. No combat system is better than any other. The skill lies within the fighter and if you were formally trained at all you would know that. Last, but not least you should read the threads before you post as we have already explained our approach to designing a working Gun Kata system. It is a very possible goal if the right people put their effort into it. I hope that after you read this you will have learned something.


P.S. Rymel where are you man? O.o

[Witcher Wolf]

I think actually, you need to (A) calm down (B) state who you're referring to and (C) have some Prozium there. Also, just a tiny bit of friendly advice since I was one of the original contributors to the Gun Kata threads way, way back.

Civility regardless of the others lack of, earns you more respect in the long run.

Insulting someone even if you're irked at what they posted is no way to get your point across.

[DemonEyedGunman]

I am aware that my post seems quite a bit agressive and I also know that you are one of the original contributors or the threads. I did state that I was referring to observer's post with my rebuttle. As for my seemingly angry post I apologize as I did not intend for it to sound that way. After the intial break in the threads when it seemed that the Gun Kata Development crew was done for Rymel, Achilles and myself started to try to push things forward ourselves. We disscussed thing via email. I believe why my post came out so aggressive is because people don't read the threads before they post and thus repeat what someone else has already stated and argued. Many times was it explained how we were trying to devolop our OWN Gun Kata based on real combative methods, systems and techniques and NOT try to duplicate the movie in any way. Yet people still post such thing because they do not do their "homework" as it were and read the threads before they decide to sum up the reason why Gun Kata cannot work. Again I apologize for the aggressive or insulting appearance of my previous post, but I do not believe that I am wrong in stating what I did. Btw, *Injects Prozium interval* happy now?

[Witcher Wolf]

Its ok Demon, but as a game developer I have learned if you really want to be taken seriously on any kind of team, losing your cool at anyone can have a detrimental effect. I have seen some of your other posts and you seem to be a cool guy, just don't let those people that irk you, get under your skin amigo.

You're certainly not wrong at all, it irks me when people post without reading back through previous threads, but I keep my head level.

[Observer]

How could I resist a reply to such a reasoned, well-thought out criticism from the Demon Eyed Gunman?

First off, I was disagreeing with another non-member "Gun Taka Sensei". I don't know whether that's you hiding under a different name. Let's pretend it isn't.

"You think that Kata is supposed to be combat training?"

It certainly seems "Gun Taka Sensei" thought so. He took poor Flard over the coals for suggesting that real martial arts like Krav Maga were superior to the fictional Gun Kata seen in the movie and promoted on his site.

"Kata is designed to familiarize yourself and allow you to master the techniques that are used in actual combat."

Great. Gun Taka Sensei's site focuses on the fictional movie Gun Kata (vide the shot of Christian Bale on page 1), what relevance does movie kata have to "actual combat"?

"Sparring is the system that is meant to familiarize and awaken you to the feel of true combat, unpredictablity."

What relevance does "true combat" have to the movie gun kata promoted by Sensei on his Equilibrium fan site? He says, "So essentialy, this is a fictional martial art. But the forms are real." Real forms for a fictional martial art work how during "true combat"?

"Next, you completely contradicted yourself by stating, "the only thing sillier than bringing a knife to a gun fight is bringing nothing."
Then you talk about the efficient combat system of Krav Maga."

Krav Maga emphasizes disarming a person pointing a gun BEFORE he shoots, while he's threatening to shoot. A gun fight is what happens when the shooting already starts. Fighting empty handed against people who are shooting at you is better left to Superman.

"Krav Maga teaches alot of gun dissarming techniques that are meant to be used in real combat situations."

'Real combat situations' being a person pointing a gun, threatening to shoot. There's a distinction between a threat and the first shot. Re-watch that video Sensei helpfully linked. In several instances the instructor would have been shot in the back if the attacker had simply wanted to shoot the instructor the moment he got the drop.

Further, let's all ignore the situations where the individual with the gun a.) knows Krav Maga himself, b.) knows how to retain a firearm against a disarm c.) prevents the Krav Maga (or any other martial arts) expert from getting too close in the first place by shooting him at a safe distance. Things like that undoubtedly never happen in the "real combat situations" you're familiar with.

"You then proceed to compliment sensei on being good at borrowing techniques from other systems of combative fighting. Well let me clue you in on something, ALL combat fighting systems are based on techniques stolen from the shaolin temple, the European Knights, and the Samurai."

Oh dear. Europe's knights must not have read your version of history.

Got some bad news for you, DEG.

The closest Medieval Europe ever got to China was the spices (and trade goods) brought through the Middle East by the Jewish Radhanites. No mention of them stealing techniques from the Shaolin temple. Even those trade routes the Radhanites travelled on collapsed by early 900s AD and Jewish merchants were being persecuted.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radhanites

Why is this important? Because Europe was cut off from China by the Middle East. All those knights who fought nearly a century later during the Norman invasion under William the Conquerer in 1066 AD didn't have Chinese Shaolin masters teaching them.

"The entire Krav Maga system is stolen from the Chinese Army's boxing routines."

The entire system, eh?

Imi Lictenfeld and Moni Isaac must not have read your version of history, either. They can join the European knights in reading "The World According To DEG".

A detailed description of Krav Maga by someone who knows what he's talking about doesn't support your Chinese Army allegations.
www.usadojo.com/martial-arts-articles/article-krav-maga-not-alone.htm

"As you are probably a 16 year boy who thinks that he can make someone feel stupid and like a simpleton, let me tell you that you suceed in only appearing to be a simpleton yourself."

No, I'm an Observer (age not given) and I've shown you're wrong about the history of Europe and you're wrong about Krav Maga. Don't worry, DEG. I'm just getting started.

...and, yes, it's going to get worse.

If we want to talk about people who think they can make someone feel stupid, "Gun Taka Sensei" did a darn good job of that on Flard.

Didn't read a peep of complaint out of you about it, either.

There's an O. Henry ending to the interchange between Flard and "Sensei". Flard was, in fact, correct in his observations on Krav Maga and its superiority to "Sensei's" own version of GunKatta (.com) based on the movies. Flard was right and got bullied into thinking he wasn't.

Poor Flard. That Sensei guy chased him off.

Right about now is a good time for everyone to take a stretch, get a cool one from the fridge, and read Phil Elmore's valuable treatises
"How To Spot A Virtual Sensei"
www.themartialist.com/pecom/vs.htm

...and "How To Spot A Virtual Tough Guy"
www.themartialist.com/pecom/vtg.htm

Now, then you were saying, Deg...

"I have been studying Martial Arts for 18+ years now. I have studied a multiple forms of Japanese Bujutsu, Muay Thai, and Krav Maga. I also served 5 years in the military, graduated Sniper School and was Captain of a Spec Ops. Squad in the."

...in the... in the... What happened? Did you run out of credentials to invent? Phil? What do you think of DEG's credentials?

>>A VTG can't help but create fanciful stories that are increasingly over the top. As a result, he or she will describe behavior so absurd as to border on self-parody. -Phil Elmore<<

Over to you, DEG...

"What have you done to merit your apparent belief that you are an expert on matters of combat?"

Phil, your views?

>>The VS is usually a bully, and a bully cannot stand criticism. When pressed about his ridiculous claims or ham-handed behavior, the VS will demand to know at what school the critic trains or teaches.- Phil Elmore<<

I never said, nor did I imply, that I am an "expert on matters of combat". Then again, you're the one citing one set of credentials after another.

'I'm a this... I'm a that... I studied this.. I studied that...' All of it largely unprovable online.

>>No one has asked, but the VTG is more than happy to march in and announce his credentials to those assembled. -Phil Elmore<<

Thanks, Phil. Now back to you, DEG...

"Multiple people here whom were apart of the original project have military, martial arts, or competition shooting background."

Is "Gun Taka Sensei" a regular contributor? Please tell me everyone else isn't posturing in their apartments like he is.

"Next time you want to make yourself look intelligent, I suggest you actually have something intelligent to say."

You mean like demonstrating your errors on the history of Europe and Krav Maga, perhaps?

Or exposing how much of a self-inflated Virtual Tough Guy/ Virtual Sensei you are truly are?

"I suggest that you first train in that system for a few years and think about the fact that there may be someone else on the world who could beat you unconcious in a matter of seconds."

Phil, take it away!

>>The implied threat, of course, is that anyone who dares criticize the VS ought to be prepared for a good thrashing. It never seems to occur to the average VS that one need not be of superior martial talent to question what the VS claims or how he approaches his participation in a discussion. The VS sees violence as the way to resolve any and all disagreements, just as any bully does. -Phil Elmore<<

Thanks, Phil. Back to you, DEG.

"Last, but not least you should read the threads before you post as we have already explained our approach to designing a working Gun Kata system. It is a very possible goal if the right people put their effort into it."

From what I've read on the other threads, less egotistical fans are bogged down in some very complicated details and disagreements.

...and your form of gun kata (whatever it's going to be) has to do with Gun Taka Sensei and his nasty criticism of Flard, how, exactly? You've lashed out at me for criticizing "Sensei". Is HE an example of what you're producing? Yes or no.

If the answer is "Yes, Gun Taka Sensei's site is an example of what we're doing", then he contradicts you. You claim that what you and others are creating your "OWN Gun Kata based on real combative methods, systems and techniques and NOT try to duplicate the movie in any way." (your words)

Yet Gun Taka Sensei claims his site's "only goal is to promote the movie, EQUILIBRIUM, and to hopefully kick-start a new martial art, if at least in kata." On his "kata" page Sensei also says, "I have refined the kata and will continue to do so as more material from the movie becomes available to me."

If Gun Taka Sensei represents what you're doing and what you're doing has no relation to the movie, then Sensei shouldn't need "more material from the movie" to develop Gun Kata.

If your answer is "No, Gun Taka Sensei and his site don't represent what we're doing", then you've been foaming at the mouth for no reason. I defended Flard's assertion that Krav Maga is a real and better martial art than whatever movie-based concept of Gun Kata that "Sensei's" fan site is promoting as "real".

Let me spell it out for you, DEG. I haven't said anything about "your" non-movie version of gun-kata.

Any criticism I had was of "Sensei" and his assertion that his movie-based gun kata is equal to Krav Maga. Still have the distinction clear?

Since you've already said the martial art you and others have been working on has nothing to do with the movie related material "in any way" (your words), and Gun Taka Sensei's site is openly movie-based, then there isn't any disagreement except the one you invented through your own arrogance, hot temper, and inability to read.

Oh, and one last thing.

"Again I apologize for the aggressive or insulting appearance of my previous post, but I do not believe that I am wrong in stating what I did."

While you may be comfortable with the hypocrisy of a back-handed apology, I'm not.

I'm not sorry at all for pointing out your ignorance, your delusions, and how badly muddled your thinking is.

...and I'm definitely not sorry for showing, point for point, how thoroughly you fit Mr. Elmore's description of the Virtual Tough Guy/ Virtual Sensei".

Hopefully, some of your fellow non-movie Gun Kata developers will take note.

[Witcher Wolf]

Observer, you really need to register

[Observer]

You're right. I should, CW.
Mr. Anderson suggested as much himself.

I'm just frightfully lazy at times, and I've been a little concerned at some of the other registration hassles other new members had.

Contrary to what others have said earlier, I most definitely have been reading many of the other threads and I've noticed that JenGe has been up to her ears in coding problems. The last thing I want to do is pile more on her plate, so to speak.

(apologies for the OT post.)

[DemonEyedGunman]

Well first of I would like to say that you have a very nice post defending your position. However, you misinterpreted what I was saying concerning a few subjects. First of all I was not saying that the Knights of Europe learned from shaolin masters. I was saying that their unarmed self defense system is one of the roots of martial arts today. As well as The Shaolin temple and the Samurai's combat arts. Your rebuttal to that statement is horrible as I clearly stated that combat systems of today are comprised of techniques stolen from those three main sources of combat knowledge from the old world. As for the Krav Maga statements you took what I said too literally. Meaning, where do you think the creators of Krav Maga learned their base combat techniques? And their teachers before them? and so on and so forth. It comes back eventually to Combat techniques developed in China and now used by the Chinese Army. So your history lessons are pointless and just a misreading of my post.

As for GunTaka Sensei, I did not back up his claims or compliment him in anyway. I agree with most of what you say about his errors in thinking that his fictional Martial Art would work in a real life combat situation and I also agree that he was trying to make an ass out of Flard. You were also right about his demonstration as the "attacker" provides NO resistance to his "counteroffensive" maneuver. To answer another question of yours, no, GunTaka Sensei was not a regular contributor in our effort to design a REAL CQ(Close Quarter) Gun combat system. We were not trying to copy the fictional system portrayed in the movie Equilibrium. What he attempts to do with his time is his own business, but that is not what Rymel, TrustKill, Achilles, myself and others were attempting to do.

Getting to you claim that I am a virtual sensei/virtual tough guy, you are mistaken. I realize that my post may have seemed to be way too aggressive, however I realized that after Cleric Wolf pointed it out. Again all I can do is say that I am sorry for being rash and overly aggressive with my post. However, I was not responding to criticism from you or anyone else when I posted. Too much of your rebuttal is based on misreading of my post and assumption on your part. At the end of your post you repeat my mistake by flinging insults instead of staying with your original calm response. Which makes you just as ignorant, delusional, and a muddled thinker as you believe I am. As for what you believed to be a threat from me, you misinterpreted what I was saying there as well because you looked on it in a much too defensive way. I was merely saying that no matter how efficient or "tough" a man is, including myself, there is always someone who is better. So I would suggest that you reread my post in a more calm frame of mind as I have your's and try to see what I was trying to point out. As for my "credentials" I merely made a typo and accidentally did not finish my sentence and if you were thinking clearly while reading it you would have thought first to ask me what the rest of that sentence was. I was in the U.S Army to complete that sentence and I don't really care if you think that I am lying about my past. I know that I am not and I don't feel it to be important enough to start an argument over and prove it to you. If you would like to know more info you could ask, but I will leave it at that.

Finally, I would suggest that if you see a certain person posting in a way that displeases you such as, throwing out insults, being derogatory, etc. Then I suggest that you do not do the same thing on your rebuttal post as it makes your argument look no better than the one you are unhappy with. As I normally don't post in such a manner as I did, I would again like to apologize for my behavior as it was uncalled for and rude. I do hope that this post helps explain to you what I was trying to say a little better. Looking forward to your response.

Oh and one more thing, next time could you please just call me Demon for short? DEG sounds too much like some rapper name or something.

[Observer]

"First of all I was not saying that the Knights of Europe learned from shaolin masters. I was saying that their unarmed self defense system is one of the roots of martial arts today.

"All" is not the same qualifier as "one of". If you clarification represents your original intent (let's pretend it does), it's a substantial revision from your previous assertion:

"ALL combat fighting systems are based on techniques stolen from the shaolin temple, the European Knights, and the Samurai."

Further

]"Your rebuttal to that statement is horrible as I clearly stated that combat systems of today are comprised of techniques stolen from those three main sources of combat knowledge from the old world. It comes back eventually to Combat techniques developed in China and now used by the Chinese Army. "

...and if that's what you truly meant it's still wrong. India (among other nations) developed its own martial traditions irrespective of China, or Europe, or Japan. There's even some argument whether India was the origin of China's martial arts. I'm not saying it is or isn't. But it's certain that India had its own martial development separate from China (or Europe, or Japan). The same (for obvious reasons) can also be said of the Aztecs and Maya.

Vide: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputed_history_of_Kalarippayattu

"As for the Krav Maga statements you took what I said too literally. Meaning, where do you think the creators of Krav Maga learned their base combat techniques?"

Sigh... I linked that history of Krav Maga for a reason.

"Prior to World War II the first term used for hand-to-hand combat by the underground Israeli Army called Haganah (the Hebrew word for defense) was "KAPAP."
...The hand-to-hand combat training was a combination of Western fighting systems such as boxing (London Prize Ring Rules), Greco-Roman wrestling, and standard British military knife and baton training.
...Some soldiers called their training KAPAP while others called it Krav Maga."

It's worth pointing out that "Western systems" apparently didn't include European knightly fighting arts like cavalry charges, jousting, fighting in armor, longsword and shield, battle axes, war hammer, two handed sword and so on. Unless I'm mistaken Europe's knights didn't box using London Prize Ring Rules, either.

"Getting to you claim that I am a virtual sensei/virtual tough guy, you are mistaken."

As I've said previously (and elsewhere), I'll leave that to the good judgement of other forum readers. They can decide for themselves how closely your comments fit Mr. Elmore's profile.

"However, I was not responding to criticism from you or anyone else when I posted. Too much of your rebuttal is based on misreading of my post and assumption on your part."

You weren't? Let me guess. You're going to claim I "misread" the following quote:

"You try to sound intelligent while stating your opinions, but to the ACTUALLY trained people that were apart of the project you are displayed as being completely ignorant. Especially with observer's post."

You also clarified who you were responding to in your remarks to Cleric Wolf:

I did state that I was referring to observer's post with my rebuttle.

When a person is called out by name, there isn't too much to misinterpret or misread.

"At the end of your post you repeat my mistake by flinging insults instead of staying with your original calm response."

Ummm... Not really. My accusation of "Virtual Tough Guy/ Virtual Sensei" is an insult only if a.) unfair or b.) untrue. Others can read your quotes, Mr. Elmores remarks (and the original essays they were taken from) and make their own decision as to my accusations' validity.

By your own admission, the basis for your aggression is because you feel the people criticizing "Gun Kata"...

don't read the threads before they post and thus repeat what someone else has already stated and argued. Many times was it explained how we were trying to devolop our OWN Gun Kata based on real combative methods, systems and techniques and NOT try to duplicate the movie in any way.

If there's any misinterpretation, it's yours Demon. Based on your comments, you believed I was criticizing your (let's call it) Real-Kata and got angry because you thought I hadn't read the threads discussing whatever you all are developing.

Flard was disparaging Movie-Kata. Sensei got very nasty in supporting his own version of Movie-Kata which has nothing to do with whatever you and others here seem to be developing. All discussion (Flard's, Sensei's, and mine) has been around Movie-Kata, not your Real-Kata.

Hopefully, that clears up most of the misreadings and misinterpretations.

[DemonEyedGunman]

I appreciate the logical reply on you response, but there is still a few things that I have perhaps not explained well enough. First being my statement concerning the medieval knights. In my original post, I stated that all systems of combat today(I meant unarmed) were taken from three bases. The shaolin temple( you are right about India being the source of their original knowledge), the Medieval Knights, and the Samurai. In my next post I tried to clear up exactly what I meant, but it appears that I did not succeed. I hope I have now.

Going to the next part concerning Krav Maga. I will give you the Greco-Roman bit as I did not think about that and it's a system over 2000 years old. However, I would like to add, that Boxing and British Knife Fighting are systems stemming from Medieval Knights combat training. As for them not using Medieval weapons that you named, I have said now and in my last post, that I was referring to the unarmed combat methods.

As for your comments about my responding to criticism, what I was trying to say was that I was not responding to criticism of myself on my original post. I was responding to your post concerning GunTaka Sensei. I also apologized for the nature of my first post as it was uncalled for. I did also agree with you on some things and stated such and stated that my first post was ridiculous and rude.

Going to you saying that you were not flinging insults, you called me, Arrogant, hot-tempered, poor reader, ignorant, delusional, and a muddled thinker. Those are not insults?

Finally, you are right about my initial aggression. Too many times did people bash on the members that were trying to create a REAL Gun Kata system. I did take what you were saying the wrong way. I was not trying to defend the efficiency of Sensei's Fictional Martial Art. I am merely tired of people trying to bring down those who want to create a working system. So I hope you can forgive me for that mistake.

I hope that this helps you in seeing my point of view and see that I am also aware of my own errors. I also hope that this finally clears up what I was initially trying to say.

[Observer]

In my original post, I stated that all systems of combat today(I meant unarmed) were taken from three bases. The shaolin temple( you are right about India being the source of their original knowledge), the Medieval Knights, and the Samurai.

...and that's where you run into additional problems, Demon. There are so much MORE than simply three basic sources of armed (or unarmed) combat in the world. Especially, as you agree, India may well have been a source of China's martial systems. So now we're up to four sources. Adding in the Greco-Roman systems of fighting, we're up to five. The Native Americans inhabiting the North American landmass (and their more culturally advanced "cousins" in Central America) developed their own as well. Now we're up to around six or seven sources. Heck, even the Hawaiians have their own independently developed martial art called, "lua". The whole world has developed martial arts. It isn't all coming from three sources.
www.coffeetimes.com/lua.htm

However, I would like to add, that Boxing and British Knife Fighting are systems stemming from Medieval Knights combat training.

err... not quite. Boxing is found all over the world. The British system of knife fighting was based on the teachings of Eric Anthony Sykes and William Ewart Fairbairn.
www.americancombatives.com/cqchistory.htm

Going to you saying that you were not flinging insults, you called me, Arrogant, hot-tempered, poor reader, ignorant, delusional, and a muddled thinker. Those are not insults?

...only if they aren't true. ;D Even you freely stated, "that my first post was ridiculous and rude."

Anyway, good luck on developing your system.

[ViolentMessiah]

i'll say it again. observer whoever you are, You da' man!

[PasserBy]

OMG!! Again with the arguing? wtf. This is definately a dead forum. I wish Rymel would come back.