Between Fact and Fiction.

It has been some years since the onset of my own disenchantment with this community and the things purported to be 'pragmatic/practical/effective.' That disenchantment is still somewhat fresh. It is hard to watch videos or read posts/books that have good material in them, let alone all the shit that tries to pass itself off as gold. 

You have all the Kata/Bunkai people on one side, and all the MMA/Anti-Traditionalist people on the other crying, whining, screaming, shouting, bickering basically, about what is 'pragmatic/practical/effective,' yet both advocating the same things without even realizing it. 

"You have to be able to use it on a fully resisting opponent in an actual sparring match" they both end up saying and yet both end up disagreeing more often than not. 

What does that even mean? Is it the same thing as 'Self-Defense?' What does THAT mean? Is it interchangeable with 'Fighting' or 'Sparring?' What about the term 'Defensive Tactics' and 'Combatives??' Is there a difference there when we look at it from THAT context? 

Marc MacYoung, in his book 'A Professional's Guide to Ending Violence Quickly' talks about how he does not Spar very much because, in the context of real Violence, Sparring builds all the wrong habits and really is only meant to prolong the fight... The key words there are 'prolong' and 'fight' which implies mutual combat and NOT Self Defense... Does it imply anything along the lines of Combatives? I would say not. Nor does it imply anything along the lines of 'Defensive Tactics' as we use them in Law Enforcement. 

Combatives are designed to kill, to end someone quickly either with a gun, knife, or in hand-to-hand without prejudice. There is no fight. The focus is different. The context is different. Defensive Tactics is meant to shut down an attack and gain control of the attacker with restraining and arresting as the ultimate goal. 

Self Defense has the goal of stopping an assailant in their tracks and getting to safety one way or another so that the authorities can be called. A Fight implies a mutual and prolonged contest at various ranges between two fighters with a goal of winning. 

All of these are very different with very different ends requiring very different tactics, albeit some do have a certain level of crossover, but going down the spectrum the crossover becomes less and less until it is none at all. 

Most people do not truly understand ANY of this beyond mere theory, many don't even understand this on a theoretical basis. 

Imagine that for a moment. You have certain people out there purporting to teach Self Defense or even some level of Defensive Tactics, yet they have no idea what they are talking about beyond their own self-conceived ideas with no real basis in reality.

You have someone that purports to teach something 'effective' based on their own idea of 'habitual acts of violence' who has never really been in a violent situation outside the ring where someone is trying to maim or kill them for real. 

Does that mean what they have to say has no value? No. It just means that what they have to say has basis in theory, but MAY be a LONG WAY off from fact. 

Some people do teach things from a historic and hobbyist perspective, which is fine, so long as they put that up front and don't market what they are selling as any form of 'Self Defense,' 'Combatives,' or 'Defensive Tactics.' There may be an element of 'Fighting' to it if they spar, but that is really more of a sport at that point. 

Then there are those who claim to teach some brutal stuff. They still have no idea what they are talking about in any context, let alone any knowledge of legal ramifications regarding what they teach or ideas they spout. 

It is good to keep focused on proper context, perspective, and know what you need to know for each and what the limitations of each approach might be.

Are you a professional that would be required to run TOWARDS violence? Know what you can and can't do, what the law says, how to articulate why you did what you did, and how to do it quickly, safely, and effectively. 

That has nothing to do with sport, that has nothing to do with style, it has everything to do with practicality in a profession that places you in situations OUTSIDE the scope of what is theoretical. There is a difference between belief and knowledge.

How do you put someone down right away? No BS, no reservations, you get it done and over with as quickly as possible. 

Marc MacYoung has a saying, 'Him. Down. Now.' That is no joke, and he is absolutely correct in saying the longer an altercation goes on the higher the chances of injury for both parties. 

This isn't a game, these aren't competitors, there are no trophies. This is life and death. Most people go their whole lives never having to face such things, others face it by choice in the professions they choose. 

No one is ever the same afterwards. 

Get over yourself.