Stephen wrote:
> i don't know
> of any martial art that doesn't take the "only for defense, never attack"
> line seriously when you talk to its senior practitioners.
Aikido certainly does, and I would argue that ju-jitsu is sympathetic to
acting only in self-defense (or defense of another).
> I grew
> up in a rough area and a non-violent response would not have helped
victims
> i had saved from worse beatings.
A little story: I still live in a very rough area. Recently a friend left my
house and walked to the local tube station (metro) across a local park. A
fourteen year old boy was bullying an eleven year old boy, so my friend
intervened and separated them. The fourteen year old went off and got his
friends, and attacked my friend before he reached the far side of the park,
causing a fractured cheekbone that needed hospital treatment.
The point being that violence begets violence; even if there arise
situations that leave us no alternative but a violent response, those
situations have come about because of poor judgement, mistakes or plain evil
intent earlier on in the process. The only way to make things better is to
stop the cycle of violence escalating, and work towards reconciliation.
Personally, I don't think the widespread presence of firearms helps in the
endeavour.
Sam
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
