Read any of the THOUSANDS of articles claiming to answer this question and 99.999% of them will bring up BJJ, Krav Maga, Boxing, Muy Thai, or all of the above. MMA has served it's purpose as a testing ground, but let's not mistake sport for reality. The blood is real, the bruises are real, but there are still rules, and "the street" doesn't have any... except for the law... but that's boring and nobody wants to think about it.
Here's a question... when we ask "which martial art is best for the streets and self defense?" what are we REALLY asking?
Are we asking "which martial arts system is best for destroying another human being thoroughly enough that they are no longer a threat?"
Are we asking "which martial arts system provides you the most efficient means of neutralization and/or escape from an attacker AND a legally defensible position after the altercation?"
Are we asking "which martial art would be ideal after the collapse of society and government where anarchy is law and only the strongest survive?"
...because these are important factors for consideration...
I don't care where BJJ came from or what they did to create it, it is good for what it is, and nothing more or less than that.
Going to ground is stupid in a real life altercation. It is good to have some "ground game" because you need to be prepared for any eventuality, but an art that aims to keep you on your feet is always better because the area you are fighting in/on is not always going to be a good place to be falling. Broken glass, sharp corners or edges to hit your head on, rocks and uneven terrain you are likely to break or dislocate something on... be prepared for the ground, but don't live there, and if you think that is worth ticking the "pros" column for BJJ you are wrong.
In my opinion as someone who has been in more than one real life physical altercation, and done time for it, and had more issues once locked up, if a system does not spend a fair amount of time dealing with the legalities of self-defense, it is not a legitimate system of self defense. Period.
When it comes to "street fights" -laws notwithstanding- striking arts reign supreme. I am saying that, and I am not a boxer or muy thai fighter. This is purely objective opinion here. If you can break their rhythm, mind the gap, and take them down without going down yourself, you "win", and striking arts are best for teaching those things.
That being said, it is still likely you will get an assault charge anyway.
Hey, look, I know I am going to get made fun of, but I trained in aikido and qin na. Before you even start though, I did not train in aikido the way most "mcdojos" teach it. My sensei was a military brat who learned in Japan. He encouraged students to get firearms carry permits, and taught us to break people, not dance with them. I am not saying my arts are the "best arts" just that this is where I am coming from...
I also come from a rough background, an abusive household, and a bad neighborhood in Memphis. I was choking kids out on the playground before I took any martial arts training. I am no bad ass. I am just a person with PTSD and a criminal record, so maybe I am not the best to answer this question...
but I do know how shit goes down, and I been in the middle of it a few times myself. Weapons are good for getting out alive, but not for staying out of jail. Breaking people is as good as hitting them, but, again, both carry their own legal risks. Guns are surprisingly more acceptable than any other weapon, provided you don't actually shoot anyone with it unless they shoot first. I went to ground twice. Once was to do that crazy "pinwheel" throw and toss a guy twice my size into a chainlink fence then run away. The second time I got kicked around like a soccer ball by half a dozen guys, tried to cut some of them, ended up cutting myself instead, then found an opening and rolled out like I was doing ukemi. I prefer to stay on my feet now, and aikido and taijiquan have given me good tools for "rooting" and "blending" to help me stay that way, but I know folks are going to rip on that and I am telling you now, I am not even going to engage in that argument again, so save it.
What martial art is best for self defense and "the streets" ha, none of 'em. What's best is to just learn to fight, and learn what the law has to say about "self defense" then do your best to combine the two fields of knowledge.
The best martial art to train in is not something you can define by "style" but rather by mode of training. You train for combat to prepare for combat. Train for war, if you are going to war. Train for sport if you are fighting for sport. Train for inner peace and discipline if those are your goals... get it? Sure some "styles" are more apt to focus on one of those over the other, but it is not the "style" that defines the mode of training.
No "style" of martial arts is going to prepare you for the chaos of real life-threatening violence! Find yourself a lawless place like Cambodia, take a trip and learn how they say "come at me bitches" in their native tongue along the way, then stroll into the baddest part of town and shout it until someone takes you up on the offer. Get locked up and challenge everyone in the clink until they throw your ass in solitary, then spend that time doing knuckle push ups and horse stance. When and if you get out, just repeat the process. That's how you train for real violence, and it is a stupid, pathetic waste of your life.
Bottom line here is it is all marketing these days. You can't trust anyone until you fight them, and if they won't fight you, find another school. When you find one where they can fight better than you without any choreography or planned actions, ask them what they know about the legality of using what you learn there to legitimately defend yourself. If they can't tell you, then learn what you can, and study the law in your spare time. Once you are comfortable, start practicing with improvised weapons and get a gun permit. Forget about "style" and go for intent.
No comments:
Post a Comment