Do You Consider Firearms Training A Martial Arts?
Original Poster: vladimir
Forum: Martial Arts Weapons
Posted On: 09-10-2006, 12:11
Orginal Post: vladimir: Do you consider if so, why and if not, why. After reading a post by another member of this board I started a discussion among several friends most of whom considered firearms to not be part of Martial Arts, so I wanted to see what people on this board thought and their reasons for it.
Post: BLACK PANTA:
I said no because I dont see firing a gun as an art form. there's nothing beautiful and harmonious about firing a gun. I would call it combat training, but not a martial art.>
Post: angryrocker4:
Yes it is, cause its not just point and shoot. You have tactics, philosophy, principles, etc and lets not forget that shooting is an art for real. Just ask any sniper. Most people dont think of the things that go into firing a bullet and hitting what you want, where you want. Even experienced hunters think its nothin more than linin up the sight posts. Hell, the majority of the population couldnt hit anything.
The harmonious thing about shooting is becoming "one" with your wweapon of choice and achieving the level that you know you can take out anything with it, and not just by chance either.
But yeah, any G-dawg from the ghetto cheese place in LA can pull a trigger, but its how an individual pursues it and takes it that makes it a MA or not. Bow and Arrow is part of japanese MA if you think about it, and back in that time period, was probably looked at the same way as guns today, though Archery's an art as well.>
Post: asag2:
I am going to have to agree with PANTA. I do not feel that firing a gun or the training of it is an art form.
On top of that, as impressed as i am with the skill of snipers, I would not consider what they do a martial art because for the most part their victims do not even have a chance to defend themselves.
Maybe if it was like dueling or something where both people were on equal plains then I can maybe see it (in some form).>
Post: bamboo:
Martial = war
The samurai that used arquebus where practicing martial arts, so why would using an updated version of the same weapon not be?
Firing a weapon involves timing, extreme pressure response, keeping a strong mental state of mind, physical awareness and in the end it about taking a life. I'm not sure how you get much more martial.
I look at it as iaido of the modern western world.
I vote yes.
-bamboo>
Post: mktexan:
[quote=angryrocker4 Yes it is, cause its not just point and shoot. You have tactics, philosophy, principles, etc and lets not forget that shooting is an art for real. Just ask any sniper. Most people dont think of the things that go into firing a bullet and hitting what you want, where you want. Even experienced hunters think its nothin more than linin up the sight posts. Hell, the majority of the population couldnt hit anything.
The harmonious thing about shooting is becoming "one" with your wweapon of choice and achieving the level that you know you can take out anything with it, and not just by chance either.
But yeah, any G-dawg from the ghetto cheese place in LA can pull a trigger, but its how an individual pursues it and takes it that makes it a MA or not. Bow and Arrow is part of japanese MA if you think about it, and back in that time period, was probably looked at the same way as guns today, though Archery's an art as well.[/quote
I would tend to agree with this. There is priciple, tactics and philosophy invloved in firing weapons. i voted no, but on second thoughts, it may be able to be considered a martial art. intersting question. I remember in Basic Training the extreeme emphasis on procedure of firing the M-16. Breath controll, trigger squeeze, sight pictures, steady position. so i guess you really can call weapons training a martial art, its just an odd thought because its not how we are used to looking at it.>
Post: zefff:
I would agree with Angryrocker and Bamboo.
We should remember that it is a simple tool the same as a fist is also a tool that we employ. The 'art' is in the mind and action. IMHO there is no beauty that can be appreciated in martial art application. The beauty is only there to see when the consequences are removed from the technique.
Even precision artillery fire, bombing from aircraft and things like bomb disposal are martial arts IMO.>
Post: dscott:
I agree with Panta. It's combat training, not a martial art.>
Post: BLACK PANTA:
correct me if I'm wrong but didn't some Samurai concider it a dis-honour to use firearms?>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
[quote=BLACK PANTA correct me if I'm wrong but didn't some Samurai concider it a dis-honour to use firearms?[/quote
Sure, and some considered it dishonorable to not have a top knot, but that doesn't mean that barbers are the arch-nemesis of martial artists.
While SOME arts are beautiful and harmonious, while SOME arts maintain a solid tradition and code, not all do. For instance, Tae Kwon Do might look good and theoretically prepares you to fight, but there's no tradition or code: it's gearing you up for a point-sparring tournament. Wing Chun has a strong tradition and code (especially student loyalty) to it, but it certainly doesn't look beautiful to one-inch punch somebody in the ribs. And then we have BJJ which has neither. The deciding factor of whether or not X is a martial art is whether or not it applies to combat, not its aesthetic appeal or traditional roots.
Going to a firing range and shooting at a target would not be considered martial training any more than, say, wailing on a heavy bag. Just because you can put knuckles to bag doesn't mean you're a boxer, and likewise just because you can pull a trigger doesn't make you a gun artist. However, if somebody went to a tactical firearms class and studied how to conceal and carry their weapon, how to draw their weapon, how to precisely use their weapon in a myriad of situations and how to maintain their weapon, then there's no difference between "gun fu" and kendo. Throw in some ethical standards via the military or law enforcement (the most likely candidates for such training, and the most qualified instructors) and you got yourself a full fledged "art," even by your implicit definition of the term.
So, yes, firearms training is a martial art if it is carried out as such.>
Post: BLACK PANTA:
des, man I can see a samurai walking to a barber, then performing hara kiri, because his barber messed up on his fade.>
Post: TenMan:
[quote=BLACK PANTA I said no because I dont see firing a gun as an art form. there's nothing beautiful and harmonious about firing a gun. I would call it combat training, but not a martial art.[/quote
Martial Arts is combat training as well. As I see it, the difference is how deep the training it and how skilled the practitioner becomes.
Just because a martial art is an art doesn't mean it's not combat and just because something is combat doesn't mean it cannot be approach also as an art.
Black Panta, have you trained with firearms before?>
Post: BLACK PANTA:
tenman, I haven't trained with firearms per say, however I have trained in disarming hand guns.
Truth be told, I have used firearms b4, but no formal training.>
Post: nbotary:
No. It takes time, patience and a desire to learn how to fight. The only way to find out how good you are is to put your knowledge to the test against someone else. It takes balls to find out if you're actually any good - even more so if you're getting your ass handed to you and you keep coming back for more. If you're in a fight and you're getting you're ass kicked and you pull a gun to end the fight, then you're nothing more than a punk ass little bitch who should of gone running back home to suck on mommy's tit at the first sign of trouble!!!
Pull a gun on me, you'd better pull that fuckin' trigger 'cuz if I get control of it, I will pull it, and I won't think twice about the family you left behind!!!>
Post: vladimir:
[quote=nbotary No. It takes time, patience and a desire to learn how to fight. The only way to find out how good you are is to put your knowledge to the test against someone else. It takes balls to find out if you're actually any good - even more so if you're getting your ass handed to you and you keep coming back for more. If you're in a fight and you're getting you're ass kicked and you pull a gun to end the fight, then you're nothing more than a punk ass little bitch who should of gone running back home to suck on mommy's tit at the first sign of trouble!!!
Pull a gun on me, you'd better pull that fuckin' trigger 'cuz if I get control of it, I will pull it, and I won't think twice about the family you left behind!!![/quote
It takes time and patience to learn how to fire a gun accurately, clean it, and learn how to draw it properly. Maybe not as much time as an unarmed Martial Arts but is there a required amount of year. I believe firearms training is a sort of Martial Arts just like Kali is with knife fighting.>
Post: angryrocker4:
[quote=nbotary No. It takes time, patience and a desire to learn how to fight. [/quote
I think thats true for learnin styles but not fighting, but Im picky like that. :P
(quote="nbotary")If you're in a fight and you're getting you're ass kicked and you pull a gun to end the fight, then you're nothing more than a punk ass little bitch(/quote)
Thats true if your the aggressor and you started the whole thing, but if Im mindin my own business and someone attacks me, Im gonna rid the world of the trash however I can. Cause you never know what the guy intends...what if he knocks you out? Easy kill there. And who's gonna stop him if he does knock you out? Not too many people will and not too many people have any honor to do whats "right" anymore either, which is sad. So thatd be like trustin your life to some trash off the street that attacked you. I probably misread somethin though........:evil:>
Post: angryrocker4:
[quote=asag2 I am going to have to agree with PANTA. I do not feel that firing a gun or the training of it is an art form.
On top of that, as impressed as i am with the skill of snipers, I would not consider what they do a martial art because for the most part their victims do not even have a chance to defend themselves.
Maybe if it was like dueling or something where both people were on equal plains then I can maybe see it (in some form).[/quote
Ninjas used to "snipe" and use other nefarious ways of dealing with oppenents without giving them a chance for defense, but its still a MA today. And Im sure lots of other MA's have "surprise techniques" in them. So that would their not MA's because of it, if I understand you correctly. When it comes down to it, its you or the other guy, I choose the other guy. :twisted: :twisted:>
Post: angryrocker4:
[quote=vladimir
It takes time and patience to learn how to fire a gun accurately, clean it, and learn how to draw it properly. Maybe not as much time as an unarmed Martial Arts but is there a required amount of year. I believe firearms training is a sort of Martial Arts just like Kali is with knife fighting.[/quote
And lets not forget thats just one type and calibur, now a true "gun fu dude" has him a literal "arsenal" of knowledge on many different firearms.>
Post: TenMan:
[quote=dscott I agree with Panta. It's combat training, not a martial art.[/quote
How would you detail the distinction between the two? What is the difference for you between Combat Training and a Martial Art?>
Post: TenMan:
[quote=vladimir [quote=nbotary No. It takes time, patience and a desire to learn how to fight. The only way to find out how good you are is to put your knowledge to the test against someone else. It takes balls to find out if you're actually any good - even more so if you're getting your ass handed to you and you keep coming back for more. If you're in a fight and you're getting you're ass kicked and you pull a gun to end the fight, then you're nothing more than a punk ass little bitch who should of gone running back home to suck on mommy's tit at the first sign of trouble!!!
Pull a gun on me, you'd better pull that fuckin' trigger 'cuz if I get control of it, I will pull it, and I won't think twice about the family you left behind!!![/quote
It takes time and patience to learn how to fire a gun accurately, clean it, and learn how to draw it properly. Maybe not as much time as an unarmed Martial Arts but is there a required amount of year. I believe firearms training is a sort of Martial Arts just like Kali is with knife fighting.[/quote
Weapons are weapons. You can use one crudely, or you can use it skillfully. The Samurai after all, if we are using them as the standard, used a bow which was a long distance weapon. Perhaps part of the distain they had for firearms was due to the type of firearm to which they had access.
Using a gun is not just a crude point and shoot. Anyone who has tried to shoot a handgun or use a rifle in a confined space knows there are principles and strategies for it's use and there is a good deal of skill involved. To shoot well, especially at any distance and in a stressful situation requires just as much skill and training as any other martial art. It requires just as much mental focus.
I believe the media has perpetuated the idea that to use a gun is easy. You just point and pull the trigger and you will kill your opponent with one shoot. The reality is very different.
Drawing a gun is much like drawing a sword. It requires skill, dexterity, speed, precision and focus even at close range. To draw and not be disarmed requires training. To draw and hit anything requires practice and training just like using a knife or sword.
I believe a weapon is a weapon and most martial arts eventually will learn to apply their practices and principles to the use of whatever weapon is at hand.>
Post: nbotary:
[quote=angryrocker4
Thats true if your the aggressor and you started the whole thing, but if Im mindin my own business and someone attacks me, Im gonna rid the world of the trash however I can. Cause you never know what the guy intends...what if he knocks you out? Easy kill there. And who's gonna stop him if he does knock you out? Not too many people will and not too many people have any honor to do whats "right" anymore either, which is sad. So thatd be like trustin your life to some trash off the street that attacked you. I probably misread somethin though........:evil:[/quote
Okay, I'll give you that point. However, under what circumstances would you be the aggressor? Seriously, with all the martial arts training that we do, why would we go out starting fights? If you're going to carry a firearm and you go out with the intention of getting into a fight, you may as well just go and rob a liquor store. You are already pre-meditating your crime of assault by taking that firearm and leaving the house with the intention of starting shit and pulling it out in order to get your way or get what you want.
But, I see where you and I agree on the point that if someone else starts shit and pulls it out, then everything else - including the law - goes out the window. If it's him or me, he may as well put his head between his legs and kiss his ass goodbye or pray that I miss when I unload every round out of that gun on him.
By the way, I'm VERY pro death penalty. You do the crime, you should get your punishment over with quickly. Fuck this automatic appeal and staying on death row for X number of years and wasting my tax dollars while you play bitch to Bubba and claim "It wasn't me." - even though it's your fuckin' face in the video camera, you were identified by X number of witnesses and your prints were all over the place!!!
Sorry to rant. We (TX) executed a woman the other night who killed her husband and kids and still claimed she was innocent the whole time. I should probably be more sympathetic since everyone in jail is innocent... :roll:>
Post: asag2:
Angryrocker4
I knew when i wrote that thread that yoiur very point about ninjas would come up, i wrote it as i did for lack of better terms. What i was trying to get (or the way i rationalize it in my mind) is that we are in a new age. If someone pulls a gun on you and you are not in a range suitable to disarm them then you really have no chance.
When you aabring up ninjas and so forth I feel it is a different context all together. With the weapons of old from no matter what range you were at a person with considerable skill was in a position to defend themselves against anything that came at them. In the situation of a gun unless bullets bounce off of you there is really no viable defense regardless of your skill level.
I see the point you are making with the whole training aspect of firearms as being a MA, but i guess what i am trying to say is that in a real world situation it is kind of taking the easy way out.>
Post: angryrocker4:
[quote=asag2
I but i guess what i am trying to say is that in a real world situation it is kind of taking the easy way out.[/quote
Well, where's the rule that said everything has to be done the hard way? :twisted:
Real world, Im takin you out the easiest and most efficient way possible so I can remove any other threats that may be around. Another reason I take Taijutsu is to add to my abilities to make real world situations EASIER. If your in it for sport and scorin points thats a whole other thing, and I think dangerous cause it teaches bad habits to train for sport purposes only. Its Like a BJJ guy who try to take you down and say its not legal to poke'em in the eyes when they try it, like Im supposed to let them tackle me.......that was an example so no BJJ flame stuff now :twisted:>
Post: asag2:
I completely agree with what you are saying. In a real world situation i would also want to end it as fast as possible with as little harm to myself as possible, but this does not waver from the fact that I feel to see the martial art aspect of just whipping a gun out and shooting somebody.>
Post: angryrocker4:
Its the trainin and connection to it, just like a sword, staff or any other tool. You can kill with any, but the training and connection you have is what makes it MA. Otherwise youd just be runnin around with a sharp metal thing and a big stick.....>
Post: zefff:
"I feel to see the martial art aspect of just whipping a gun out and shooting somebody."
Angryrocker answered this well and politely but seriously this is not an intelligent line. If by "feel" you meant fail, then please go and look up martial in the dictionary.
A gun is the same as a fist or even a harsh word. Like ar4 said, its just a tool.
IMHO if you dont think firearms training is a martial art then you are denying that the box has corners, let alone thinking outside of it.
peace.>
Post: setsu nin to:
We are talking here about MARTIAL arts, so yes, I consider training with fire weapons as part of martial arts training.>
Post: nbotary:
[quote=zefff IMHO if you dont think firearms training is a martial art then you are denying that the box has corners, let alone thinking outside of it.[/quote DAMN, ZEFFF!!! THAT was deep!!! :D>
Post: setsu nin to:
Sword is part of martial arts and martial arts training, same as stick, spear, chain, knife, axe, throwing blades? even making poisons and use of same, but gun or rifle is not???>
Post: zefff:
I agree Setsu, off the top of my head I would add defensive driving, living off the land, conflict management, psychology, herbalism, medicine, bone setting and healing, use of compass, map reading, navigation, language skills, joinery and woodwork, machine repair, electronics, computer skills etc etc.
Basically any skill might have a martial application. Maybe people dissagree because our definitions of MA differ???
Although when we practice we say "Yeah, I train in X martial art", IMHO all we are doing is developing something within us that doesnt exist until it is actually employed, if ever. For me my 'martial art' does not exist until I use it because the martial art (or whats most important) is not the techniques, methods and principles but the end result. The techniques are not the martial art, doing what I have to, to get what I want at a particular time is the actual martial art.
If you disagree say so because this is only what I think today. Maybe its wrong.
cheers.>
Post: Iron Knuckles:
Anyone ever see the movie Equilibrium? this thread just reminded me of that film and the "gun katas". Not real believable, but it definately draws a connection between firearms and martial arts.>
Post: Iron Knuckles:
whoops, just realized that this is kind of an old thread. sorry 'bout that.>
Post: Dirty_Irishman:
The real definition of martial arts is any art or skill used for martial ie military purposes so yes. I even read that in feudal japan horse back riding (not just trotting mind you) was considered a martial art. But that's just my opinion I could be wrong.
Besides haven't you people seen Equilibrium, with the gun katas? Or any John Woo movie for that matter.>
Post: Gangsta_Nerd:
I voted YES on this topic. I won't go into detail, since many have already agreed with me.
All I will say is:
I PRACTICE GUN FU AT THE RANGE EVERY WEEK END! :lol:>
Post: Whitey:
As a 22 year veteran police officer AND a 22 year practicioner of the martial arts, I honestly had never considered this as a question and quite frankly, my knee jerk reaction was that training in firearms is NOT a martial art. However, after some thought I changed my mind and here's part of the reason why. The following is a partial quote reprinted from the International Martial Arts Unions Association website:
"If we train for our survival, our Training is MARTIAL. If we train our Body, Spirit and Mind, our MARTIAL Training is an ART. If we train, really, our MARTIAL ART is a COMBAT."
I agree with this, so I would probably take it a step farther by saying it is a Combat Martial Art.>
Post: samurai6string:
Whiety> I totally agree. Also there is a big difference in being able to shoot a target, and being able to move effectively, reload efficiently, and accuratley hit a moving target while on the run. I believe if you consider all of that, you can definatley see the art and refinement or skills involved to consider it a martial art.>
Post: angryrocker4:
Now all I have to do is convince everyone that viking berzerker rage is a martial art!>
Post: Dirty_Irishman:
Beserker rage was created, in theory, by an organic amphetamine made from various natural sources. And I read somewhere that its believed that the leader would take a truly heavy dose and then piss in a pot for the others to drink, thus sharing the effects. The first part seems likely, but the piss part, while plausible, I'd like to not consider an option. But the beserker rage would easily be countered by the footwork taught by EscrimaConcepts ;)>
Post: samurai6string:
:) I don't think that will ever get old.............but that's because EscrimaConcepts has discovered the fountain of youth in the swamps of Florida, by way of his superior theory.>
Post: Whitey:
Okay angryrocker4, in a match up between a viking and a samarian such as Conan (use only the first Conan movie as a gauge, the second absolutely blew!), who wins?>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
[quote=Whitey Okay angryrocker4, in a match up between a viking and a samarian such as Conan (use only the first Conan movie as a gauge, the second absolutely blew!), who wins?[/quote
Viking wins over Conan every time. Conan is too busy managing the affairs of Calfiornia to keep in shape while Vikings get plenty of exercise pillaging.>
Post: Whitey:
Don't underestimate Conan, he's busy true enough... but right about now (here in the States, anyway) Vikings have been spending way too much time on TV themselves! "What's in your wallet?">
Post: samurai6string:
okay, what about a viking vs. a Mongul on horse back?>
Post: xcal:
Ressurection!!! because my neighbour just shot dead a Hijacker...but 2 others got away.
I see martial arts in its entirety as being a co-ordination of body and mind to defeat any obstacle. More than that, it includes the WILL to do so. With this in mind, I believe that my neighbour showed the ultimate form of martial arts, wether he had relevant training or not.
My training and belief is that one should roll with the punches. This tells me that I should get a gun, and train in order to adapt to the world around me. This is however against my philosophy and belief in Karma (Newton described karma quite well :every action has an equal and opposite reaction).
aah well. I will be guilty of taking a fist or stick to a gunfight when my turn comes around:-( I just hope that my conviction can stop bullets.
regards
Xcal>
Post: jlambvo:
Combat shooting absolutely is a martial art.
Even ignoring the interpretation of martial art as martial ARTISAN, neither "art" nor "beauty" have anything to do with looking pretty and flowery.
There are many paintings and sculptures that are pretty, well-crafted, and are still utterly DEAD and EMPTY.... nothing artful about that. This is all too common in the martial arts.
Even if you do not view the "art" of martial arts as simply referring to refined skill (artisan), anything that reminds you to the core of your own mortality like firearms do is IMO more artful than a great many crappy paintings.>
Post: graham1:
Shooting can be got down to a fine art, just as any other weapons training can. Some of the special forces personnel in armies around the world have phenominal skills in this. The time, physical effort put in by these people, & the hand & eye coordination & skill they achieve shows that shooting is every bit a martial art as any other.>
Post: sunnzi:
Watch this, and tell me shooting / firearms training isn't a martial art.
http://www.break.com/index/quickload.html>
Post: dscott:
[quote=sunnzi Watch this, and tell me shooting / firearms training isn't a martial art.
http://www.break.com/index/quickload.html[/quote
I don't know much about guns but would that still be possible if he actually fired the gun?>
Post: sunnzi:
[quote=dscott [quote=sunnzi Watch this, and tell me shooting / firearms training isn't a martial art.
http://www.break.com/index/quickload.html[/quote
I don't know much about guns but would that still be possible if he actually fired the gun?[/quote
Depends on the modle of fire arm but it would be a matter of a second or two more.>
Post: Arjun:
I don't see why not. I am sure he learned that skill for timed shooting tournaments. The gun he is using has no purpose outside such a tournament, and the location he is grabbing extra magazines from is also evident of this (if you were carrying around a gun a everyday basis you would have your clips secured on your side with a buttoned or velcro cover to keep them in place).
It is pretty impressive. I have seen guys in combat tournaments where they have to navigate their way through an urban-type obstacle course and shoot many targets with live rounds before being shot themselves (not with live rounds). The level of skill and training these guys have is immense, and these is seen to some degree in military and police training as well. I would call 'em artists.>
Post: Hengest:
Yeah, that video looks like it's showing racegun reloading techniques for IPSC competition. I suppose it's martial art technique, but only in the way that those 720-degree spinning kicks you see in "extreme MA" is martial art technique.>
Post: darkside05:
Now this is just my two cents, but to be honest I find the debate over whether to call gunning a martial art about as trivial as the debate over whether Pluto is a planet or a moon. I mean whether this is called a martial art or not doesn't change a thing. Either way there is a massive amount of skill involved in sharpshooting, I know I sure have a long way to go because compared to my dad (a retired marine) I suck at long distance shooting and such. But I do intend, whether this is still called a martial art or not, to still pursue learning the skill it takes to truly be good. I voted it down as a martial art for my own personal reasons but it all just comes down to an individuals view of what a martial art is. Me personally, I don't care, a bullet to the head from a .50 cal a hundred yards away is still lethal :twisted: .>
Post: V-for-Vendetta:
I voted "yes" because of the same reasons other members did. I think the timing and accuracy is in fact an art form. Also, there is philosophy behind it, depending on the individual who is firing the gun.
Example: Gangs (although I'm not advocating them) use guns, and many gangs have a philosophy. They have a reason why they got started, and use that reason to fuel their gang, making them more financially and physically powerful.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=vladimir Do you consider if so, why and if not, why. After reading a post by another member of this board I started a discussion among several friends most of whom considered firearms to not be part of Martial Arts, so I wanted to see what people on this board thought and their reasons for it.[/quote
No, it is not an art. Art requires first of creativity. Secondly it requires the inspiration and expression of spirit, or chi. While I suppose in the loosest sense you could say this happen shooting things well, I think we are trying to strecth the definition of martial art a little too far.
You could call anything an art if done with enough skill, forethought, etc, however really, let's not make something as clumsy, and cowardly, as a gun a martial art. You can kill a man from miles away, it is a weapon without honor.
Do I consider it one, no, not at all, and never will. Grea skill in a thing doe's not necessarily make it into what you want it to be, there is more to the arts martial then just skill. Th ability to read your foe, to know what he will do before you do. As far as tactics, you must, if your a sniper, think about the wind, and such minute details, this is not tactics though, the gun is not the way, and trying to make it the way will not succeed, no matter how hard you try.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=V-for-Vendetta I voted "yes" because of the same reasons other members did. I think the timing and accuracy is in fact an art form. Also, there is philosophy behind it, depending on the individual who is firing the gun.
Example: Gangs (although I'm not advocating them) use guns, and many gangs have a philosophy. They have a reason why they got started, and use that reason to fuel their gang, making them more financially and physically powerful.[/quote
Philosophy doe's not make art, and I would be interested in the philosophy, you must know it to make this statement. I do not doubt that it hs one, I have one about how to take a proper dump, I do not think this makes taking a dump and art though, do you? Timing is important in taking a dumb to, for if my timing is wrong, I dump in my pants, not in to crapper. Lets be real, by your loose definition and shoddy logic, anything can become an art, and I think we realy need to hold higher standards for what is called an art.>
Post: zefff:
Welcome to FA Nathan!
I find your argument quite weak and contradictory but I cant be bothered to explain why in depth right now. I do find it amusing though that your sword was not made for swishing through the air yet it now is held in esteem for that while your rectum is ridculed and looked down on for deftly performing its intended function each day.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=zefff Welcome to FA Nathan!
I find your argument quite weak and contradictory but I cant be bothered to explain why in depth right now. I do find it amusing though that your sword was not made for swishing through the air yet it now is held in esteem for that while your rectum is ridculed and looked down on for deftly performing its intended function each day.[/quote
I don't recall saying anything about my sword, and if my arguement is weak, you must say why it is weak, or say nothing at all. It is weak to say something is weak and not back up your arguement.
Shooting a gun, while there may be an art to it, can not be compared to something like a sword, or empty hand fighting. While repitition is required to gain the skill, the level of risk is often so low as to be neglible.
Now if your talking about someone who is in combat, or a cop, keeping his cool, and having the mental, spiritual discipline, to use the weaponeffectively, then it is not the gun that he is employing as an art, that is martial arts, but it has nothing to do with the gun. Your mixing up the weapon with the necessary mindset, spiritual atitude that applies to anyone in combat, be they using a gun, or a sword. Your making the petty mistake of boiling it all down to the weapon, which it has little if anything to do with.
It's not the weapon, it's the man. However if your getting super physical, and ignoring the mind and the spirit, and I am talkin about more then just simple concentration, then no, it by itself is not an art, and what you say makes it an art is realy martial arts at it's heart, and has nothing to do with the gun itself.
Oh, but your arguement was ok to. Bye bye :)>
Post: zefff:
Here is my initial answer.
[quote=zefff ...it is a simple tool the same as a fist is also a tool that we employ. The 'art' is in the mind and action. IMHO there is no beauty that can be appreciated in martial art application. The beauty is only there to see when the consequences are removed from the technique.[/quote
'Art' really is a folly. When talking of Martial arts really all I see is intent and consequence because that is all that matters. Just the same as building a house, making a cake or taking a dump. You cannot deny this because its a universal truth. If your intention is to perform a kata what is the consequence? If this is martial 'art' in your mind then I conclude that your art has small worth as it doesnt achieve or impact on anything outside of your own head. It is like making a beautiful cake that is inedible or a fancy house that isnt very homely. It may be art to the beholder but it is removed from its purpose.
A scrunched up piece of paper can be called art but a flat piece of paper is called stationary and is easily overlooked.
[quote=NathanRahl I don't recall saying anything about my sword, and if my arguement is weak, you must say why it is weak, or say nothing at all. It is weak to say something is weak and not back up your arguement.[/quote
I dont recall mentioning that it was you who mentioned any sword.
I dont have to do anything you tell me to.
I am busy at work so simply dont have the time to address all the failings in your logic but:
[quote=NathanRahl No, it is not an art. Art requires first of creativity. Secondly it requires the inspiration and expression of spirit, or chi.[/quote
There is creativity in shooting for sport, combat and self-indulgence although if I accept that there isnt for a moment, I would then have to say there isnt any in primitive weapons or emptyhand because of the fact that techniques are drilled over and over thousands of times. This drilling erradicates creativity in expression and creates protocol doesnt it?
[quote=NathanRahl Shooting a gun, while there may be an art to it, can not be compared to something like a sword, or empty hand fighting. While repitition is required to gain the skill, the level of risk is often so low as to be neglible. [/quote
"WHILE THERE MAY BE AN ART TO IT???" Thats contradiction. Also, "risk"? What risk, please explain? Where was the risk to Monét while creating his impressionist daubs? Is his work not art then if no risk was involved in the art itself or the accruance of skills?
[quote=NathanRahl Now if your talking about someone who is in combat, or a cop, keeping his cool, and having the mental, spiritual discipline, to use the weaponeffectively, then it is not the gun that he is employing as an art, that is martial arts, but it has nothing to do with the gun. Your mixing up the weapon with the necessary mindset, spiritual atitude that applies to anyone in combat, be they using a gun, or a sword. Your making the petty mistake of boiling it all down to the weapon, which it has little if anything to do with.[/quote
No you are making the 'petty mistakes' by wrongfully assuming things. See my first post which is highlighted at the top. I already expressed a difference between the action with and without consequence.
With intent and consequence it doesnt become labelled as art until we are satisfied and can reflect and be nostalgic. At the point in time of execution the art is intent!
This is amusing though because you mentioned the weapon not having anything to do with the art yet you deny firearms use have any merit as martial art...Another blatant contradiction!
[quote=NathanRahl It's not the weapon, it's the man.[/quote
Agreed. So if art is in man and a weapon is an extension of man then their is art in fire arms by your own use of logic.
[quote=NathanRahl However if your getting super physical, and ignoring the mind and the spirit, and I am talkin about more then just simple concentration, then no, it by itself is not an art, and what you say makes it an art is realy martial arts at it's heart, and has nothing to do with the gun itself.[/quote
WTF!?!? :lol: As I said, welcome to FA.com!
peace.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=zefff Here is my initial answer.
[quote=zefff ...it is a simple tool the same as a fist is also a tool that we employ. The 'art' is in the mind and action. IMHO there is no beauty that can be appreciated in martial art application. The beauty is only there to see when the consequences are removed from the technique.[/quote
'Art' really is a folly. When talking of Martial arts really all I see is intent and consequence because that is all that matters. Just the same as building a house, making a cake or taking a dump. You cannot deny this because its a universal truth. If your intention is to perform a kata what is the consequence? If this is martial 'art' in your mind then I conclude that your art has small worth as it doesnt achieve or impact on anything outside of your own head. It is like making a beautiful cake that is inedible or a fancy house that isnt very homely. It may be art to the beholder but it is removed from its purpose.
A scrunched up piece of paper can be called art but a flat piece of paper is called stationary and is easily overlooked.
[quote=NathanRahl I don't recall saying anything about my sword, and if my arguement is weak, you must say why it is weak, or say nothing at all. It is weak to say something is weak and not back up your arguement.[/quote
I dont recall mentioning that it was you who mentioned any sword.
I dont have to do anything you tell me to.
I am busy at work so simply dont have the time to address all the failings in your logic but:
[quote=NathanRahl No, it is not an art. Art requires first of creativity. Secondly it requires the inspiration and expression of spirit, or chi.[/quote
There is creativity in shooting for sport, combat and self-indulgence although if I accept that there isnt for a moment, I would then have to say there isnt any in primitive weapons or emptyhand because of the fact that techniques are drilled over and over thousands of times. This drilling erradicates creativity in expression and creates protocol doesnt it?
[quote=NathanRahl Shooting a gun, while there may be an art to it, can not be compared to something like a sword, or empty hand fighting. While repitition is required to gain the skill, the level of risk is often so low as to be neglible. [/quote
"WHILE THERE MAY BE AN ART TO IT???" Thats contradiction. Also, "risk"? What risk, please explain? Where was the risk to Monét while creating his impressionist daubs? Is his work not art then if no risk was involved in the art itself or the accruance of skills?
[quote=NathanRahl Now if your talking about someone who is in combat, or a cop, keeping his cool, and having the mental, spiritual discipline, to use the weaponeffectively, then it is not the gun that he is employing as an art, that is martial arts, but it has nothing to do with the gun. Your mixing up the weapon with the necessary mindset, spiritual atitude that applies to anyone in combat, be they using a gun, or a sword. Your making the petty mistake of boiling it all down to the weapon, which it has little if anything to do with.[/quote
No you are making the 'petty mistakes' by wrongfully assuming things. See my first post which is highlighted at the top. I already expressed a difference between the action with and without consequence.
With intent and consequence it doesnt become labelled as art until we are satisfied and can reflect and be nostalgic. At the point in time of execution the art is intent!
This is amusing though because you mentioned the weapon not having anything to do with the art yet you deny firearms use have any merit as martial art...Another blatant contradiction!
[quote=NathanRahl It's not the weapon, it's the man.[/quote
Agreed. So if art is in man and a weapon is an extension of man then their is art in fire arms by your own use of logic.
[quote=NathanRahl However if your getting super physical, and ignoring the mind and the spirit, and I am talkin about more then just simple concentration, then no, it by itself is not an art, and what you say makes it an art is realy martial arts at it's heart, and has nothing to do with the gun itself.[/quote
You seem to have a lot of time to write for someone who has no time.
You say my logic is flawed, but you don't say how. Also, it seems we agree on many points, yet you are disagreing with me, but I don't exactly know about what.
Your a rather disagreeable fellow for someon who says they agree with me, also, your thinking in a very limited way.
The art is not in the weapon, but in the man, this doe's not mean that the action itself is art. Only someone who has the skill and expertise can elevate something to an art, the act itself is not inherantly artful though. Are you sure you went to college and studied philosophy or any logic based reasoning structures? Because all I se is someone trying to sound smart and using the word logic, but not reallybacking up their arguements with anything other then lame, weak words and explanations.
I'm sorry, but you use the word logic without understanding it's meaning. can anyone say sudo-intellectual.
Yes, you should get back to work, while I go to bed, I am in China, as I said, and here it is rather late. Good night ;)
WTF!?!? :lol: As I said, welcome to FA.com!
peace.[/quote >
Post: zefff:
Quote: You seem to have a lot of time to write for someone who has no time.
You say my logic is flawed, but you don't say how. Also, it seems we agree on many points, yet you are disagreing with me, but I don't exactly know about what.
Your a rather disagreeable fellow for someon who says they agree with me, also, your thinking in a very limited way.
The art is not in the weapon, but in the man, this doe's not mean that the action itself is art. Only someone who has the skill and expertise can elevate something to an art, the act itself is not inherantly artful though. Are you sure you went to college and studied philosophy or any logic based reasoning structures? Because all I se is someone trying to sound smart and using the word logic, but not reallybacking up their arguements with anything other then lame, weak words and explanations.
I'm sorry, but you use the word logic without understanding it's meaning. can anyone say sudo-intellectual.
Yes, you should get back to work, while I go to bed, I am in China, as I said, and here it is rather late. Good night
Here is a list. Lists are great when one cannot be bothered to correctly quote out a reply and they are eas to follow for most readers.
1) I can make time because I can multitask, plus the fact that I operate four computers on my desk and at least one is always on the net.
2) Your logic is flawed because you contradict yourself. It is written in plain English in your posts and I tried to highlight the occurances with my quotations but you still missed them for some reason. I also 'said how' in my replies underneath each quotation - did you not read those?
3) Yes I agree that we agree on some points but seem to disagree. This is because you are contradictory and so in effect are in disagreeance with yourself at times. I tried to sum up my case with the bit about weapons being an extension of man but Im not sure if you read that and understood it. i.e. How it prooves that by your logic, firearms practice is no different to swordsmanship or kick-boxing.
"The art is not in the weapon, but in the man..."
You are repeating yourself. We already agreed this.
"...this doe's not mean that the action itself is art."
So when does it 'become' art in your mind? Ive already explained that I believe it is when the viewer has had time to look back and contemplate the work.
"Only someone who has the skill and expertise can elevate something to an art, the act itself is not inherantly artful though."
So even if someone has infinite God-like skill and expertise in firearms any action will not be art in your eyes yet I am limited in my thinking???
4) How am I thinking in a limited way? Surely if we agree then you are limited too. Also, by your own principle ("say why...or say nothing at all"), I cannot accept your assumption of my limited thinking when you have not presented a detailed analysis and explanation. You seem to be in contradiction again.
5) Yes I have attended university but not to study philosophy. You mention 'what you see' but you do not see me. You see an image in your head. This image is your own construction. Your whole world is your own construction. I am not allowed into your world because it turns your sky black. This is what I get from your posts.
I do not care what logic means to you or what it means to the most learned. You presented an arguement and gave reasons, applying your logic. I used the logic YOU put forward to confound your argument while you could not do the same for mine... AND YOU HAVE THE FOOLS BRAVERY TO CALL MY REASONING LAME AND WEAK!
STFU and re-read the bits where I show you your own contradiction.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=zefff
Quote: You seem to have a lot of time to write for someone who has no time.
You say my logic is flawed, but you don't say how. Also, it seems we agree on many points, yet you are disagreing with me, but I don't exactly know about what.
Your a rather disagreeable fellow for someon who says they agree with me, also, your thinking in a very limited way.
The art is not in the weapon, but in the man, this doe's not mean that the action itself is art. Only someone who has the skill and expertise can elevate something to an art, the act itself is not inherantly artful though. Are you sure you went to college and studied philosophy or any logic based reasoning structures? Because all I se is someone trying to sound smart and using the word logic, but not reallybacking up their arguements with anything other then lame, weak words and explanations.
I'm sorry, but you use the word logic without understanding it's meaning. can anyone say sudo-intellectual.
Yes, you should get back to work, while I go to bed, I am in China, as I said, and here it is rather late. Good night
Here is a list. Lists are great when one cannot be bothered to correctly quote out a reply and they are eas to follow for most readers.
1) I can make time because I can multitask, plus the fact that I operate four computers on my desk and at least one is always on the net.
2) Your logic is flawed because you contradict yourself. It is written in plain English in your posts and I tried to highlight the occurances with my quotations but you still missed them for some reason. I also 'said how' in my replies underneath each quotation - did you not read those?
3) Yes I agree that we agree on some points but seem to disagree. This is because you are contradictory and so in effect are in disagreeance with yourself at times. I tried to sum up my case with the bit about weapons being an extension of man but Im not sure if you read that and understood it. i.e. How it prooves that by your logic, firearms practice is no different to swordsmanship or kick-boxing.
"The art is not in the weapon, but in the man..."
You are repeating yourself. We already agreed this.
"...this doe's not mean that the action itself is art."
So when does it 'become' art in your mind? Ive already explained that I believe it is when the viewer has had time to look back and contemplate the work.
"Only someone who has the skill and expertise can elevate something to an art, the act itself is not inherantly artful though."
So even if someone has infinite God-like skill and expertise in firearms any action will not be art in your eyes yet I am limited in my thinking???
4) How am I thinking in a limited way? Surely if we agree then you are limited too. Also, by your own principle ("say why...or say nothing at all"), I cannot accept your assumption of my limited thinking when you have not presented a detailed analysis and explanation. You seem to be in contradiction again.
5) Yes I have attended university but not to study philosophy. You mention 'what you see' but you do not see me. You see an image in your head. This image is your own construction. Your whole world is your own construction. I am not allowed into your world because it turns your sky black. This is what I get from your posts.
I do not care what logic means to you or what it means to the most learned. You presented an arguement and gave reasons, applying your logic. I used the logic YOU put forward to confound your argument while you could not do the same for mine... AND YOU HAVE THE FOOLS BRAVERY TO CALL MY REASONING LAME AND WEAK!
STFU and re-read the bits where I show you your own contradiction.[/quote
Why should I, your hardly worth my time anymore. Take care.>
Post: zefff:
:lol: Because Im actually helping you! You remind me of one of my teachers TBH. He is the greatest troll I ever met. You arent that stupid I can tell, but when you act like a stubborn ignoramus you only hurt yourself.
peace>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=zefff :lol: Because Im actually helping you! You remind me of one of my teachers TBH. He is the greatest troll I ever met. You arent that stupid I can tell, but when you act like a stubborn ignoramus you only hurt yourself.
peace[/quote
Look in the mirror, read this post, and then take your own advice.>
Post: zefff:
If you re-read my post you will see I actually didnt offer any advise within it. SO THERE! :P
Your hilarious mate. I honestly really have enjoyed having you around the forum today. I sincerely hope you stay so that we can learn more about and from the real Mr Rahl.
peace>
Post: dscott:
I think he's a dick. I think he's an ego maniac and has some sort of mental disorder where he can't even take critisism or feedback. He might be very knowledgable but he's acting like an ignorant know-it-all.
Unless he has a serious change in attitude, I'm glad he's going.>
Post: Robert_RedBeard:
I voted yes.
Because Both dealing with a firearm while unarmed and fighting with a firearm are definite skill sets.
Just firing a gun properly is a skill itself. It is not just pulling a trigger.
If you want to do it well, you must practice and you must practice right. If you wanna perform the skill well under stress, you must practice it under stress. Just like any martial art I know of.
Martial Art means Battle Skill. It does not mean old.
IMHO, if you are not training with several firearms you are not practicing a practical martial art.
If you are not doing it realistically then you are not gonna do it right under stress. When it counts.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=Robert_RedBeard I voted yes.
Because Both dealing with a firearm while unarmed and fighting with a firearm are definite skill sets.
Just firing a gun properly is a skill itself. It is not just pulling a trigger.
If you want to do it well, you must practice and you must practice right. If you wanna perform the skill well under stress, you must practice it under stress. Just like any martial art I know of.
Martial Art means Battle Skill. It does not mean old.
IMHO, if you are not training with several firearms you are not practicing a practical martial art.
If you are not doing it realistically then you are not gonna do it right under stress. When it counts.[/quote
This was my point exactly, that it is not the weapon that makes it a combat art, or art at all, but the ability and mental prowess of the wielder, which applies to any weapon use. The weaopn itself and using it is not the art, it's your temperment and demeanor, control over your emotions, that elevates it to an art.
Also, I am really a pretty laid back guy, and I can handle criticism, given honestly and without bias. As for mental disorder, tend to your own yard buddy, your the one being a dick making comments like that. If you feel threatened by me or annoyed, that doe's not give you the right to be a dick yourself.
Yes I am knowledgeable, but I don't like hearing from people only to critisize. I hve posted a great deal of useful, helpful info, and not one thankyou or, that's good to know. But disagree with someone, and your attacked like a dead dog by a pack of vultures. This is what annoys me, makes me mad, and get's me to show it. Be more appreciative in the future, and express positive feelings and gratitude to balance out your lust for criticism, and you'll find me, and many others much more receptive and enjoyable to talk to. Oh, but giving credit to others you may feel could detract from you in some way. All the more reason to do it. Take care.>
Post: angryrocker4:
Dude, you're not helping anyone here and come off as arrogant.>
Post: Robert_RedBeard:
ME?>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=angryrocker4 Dude, you're not helping anyone here and come off as arrogant.[/quote
Well, if you have read all of my posts, have an interest in swords, and learned some things you did not know, then you have been helped. Also, name calling is arrogant. And I am not dude thank you. Good day.>
Post: angryrocker4:
If you're not a dude then you're an asshole.>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=angryrocker4 If you're not a dude then you're an asshole.[/quote
Thank you angry rocker, from you I take that as a compliment :)>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=angryrocker4 If you're not a dude then you're an asshole.[/quote
Oh, one other thing, I was just wondering where the moderator was, angry rocker, you do know you have broken a goodly number of the forums rules about blatantly insulting other members in public forum, don't you? Calling someone an ahole is not something that can be misinterpreted, nor is it subtle. You've broken the rules, I do hope the moderator gives you a good talking to.>
Post: bamboo:
The mods don't need your help mr. rahl, we do just fine.
You reap what you sow here, if someone thinks your being a jerk then they will tell so, you sir have taken such liberty yourself.
-bamboo>
Post: angryrocker4:
You didnt want to be a dude, if you're not A then by default you must be B. B was what you wanted and have so far yet to show otherwise. All I was doing was identifying the fact you are indeed an asshole. Is being whiney a part of your "no style" style?>
Post: NathanRahl:
[quote=bamboo The mods don't need your help mr. rahl, we do just fine.
You reap what you sow here, if someone thinks your being a jerk then they will tell so, you sir have taken such liberty yourself.
-bamboo[/quote
Thats true bamboo, but from someone who claims to take their job so seriously that they warn people about posting on old posts, one would think you would be more up on your job, considering how "serious" you take it. Can't have ti both ways, either you take it serious, or yuo singled me out for some reason. Gotcha pal, or do you have some other excuse. Wait, I have yet to hear an excuse period, lol. Good day "Moderator" what a joke.>
Post: angryrocker4:
You seem unhappy here, why do you persist on coming?>
Post: bamboo:
Thread is locked-
Please use only one thread at a time to call me an asshole, say I suck, worry about me, worry about my "job" hee hee as a mod.
Seriously, I bet you fantasize about meeting me and beating me up with your one handed technique....
-bamboo
edit- unlocked>
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|