One thing that I've found important in stressful, potentially dangerous situations is what I call (for lack of a better term) the "fighting mentality," or the ability to stay cool and make rapid, decisive actions under stress.
This is something that our *cough* "enlightened" society has largely stripped out of our culture. To me it's obviously important for non-defense situations, such as a serious child's accident that requires immediate action to apply first aid and an orderly rush to treatment, or remaining calm in the face of road rage.
A question for my esteemed peers on this forum is, do you pursue anything that assists in training in this area (outside of the range), and what/how?
To continue pointlessly rambling...
At the risk of overgeneralizing, my experience with too many (most?) asian martial arts studios is that they do not really train a person to mentally handle an encounter with an aggressor. Too frequently they suffer from what some have called the "McDojo complex." This is not to criticize the terrific sporting and fitness aspects, but I've met far too many individuals who do not comprehend (and falsely think they can handle) an adversarial fight, in contrast to a friendly sparring match. The speed and brutality of a combative encounter is astonishing. (I'm very grateful that I've had few.)
I've been studying a number of the surviving European personal combat manuals from the Renaissance and late middle ages. (This is the time period immediately before firearms became prevalent.) I find it curious that even in these manuals distinctions are made between training for combat and friendly encounters, and include warnings about "clown fighters" (klopffechter) and others whose schools are all talk and show. The actual material in the combat manuals was designed for warfare, emphasising economy of motion; and rapidly killing, debilitating, or otherwise neutralizing an opponent.
It has been kind of fascinating stuff, especially since it demonstrates that the core of the human experience in the face of life-and-death violent aggression has not fundamentally changed over the 500+ years. Only the specific tools available have altered.
I suppose that this is a long-winded way to say that I believe that the training I've been participating in doesn't substitute for time on the gun range, but certainly compliments it nicely.
Plus it's nice to know that just because I'm a bit chubby and hitting 40 years come this winter that I'm not even close to being put out to pasture. :lol:
This is something that our *cough* "enlightened" society has largely stripped out of our culture. To me it's obviously important for non-defense situations, such as a serious child's accident that requires immediate action to apply first aid and an orderly rush to treatment, or remaining calm in the face of road rage.
A question for my esteemed peers on this forum is, do you pursue anything that assists in training in this area (outside of the range), and what/how?
To continue pointlessly rambling...
At the risk of overgeneralizing, my experience with too many (most?) asian martial arts studios is that they do not really train a person to mentally handle an encounter with an aggressor. Too frequently they suffer from what some have called the "McDojo complex." This is not to criticize the terrific sporting and fitness aspects, but I've met far too many individuals who do not comprehend (and falsely think they can handle) an adversarial fight, in contrast to a friendly sparring match. The speed and brutality of a combative encounter is astonishing. (I'm very grateful that I've had few.)
I've been studying a number of the surviving European personal combat manuals from the Renaissance and late middle ages. (This is the time period immediately before firearms became prevalent.) I find it curious that even in these manuals distinctions are made between training for combat and friendly encounters, and include warnings about "clown fighters" (klopffechter) and others whose schools are all talk and show. The actual material in the combat manuals was designed for warfare, emphasising economy of motion; and rapidly killing, debilitating, or otherwise neutralizing an opponent.
It has been kind of fascinating stuff, especially since it demonstrates that the core of the human experience in the face of life-and-death violent aggression has not fundamentally changed over the 500+ years. Only the specific tools available have altered.
I suppose that this is a long-winded way to say that I believe that the training I've been participating in doesn't substitute for time on the gun range, but certainly compliments it nicely.
Plus it's nice to know that just because I'm a bit chubby and hitting 40 years come this winter that I'm not even close to being put out to pasture. :lol:
