About this blog

Share your views and opinions with the Sunday Sun bloggers: Ken Oxley's life of a middle-aged man, Mike Kelly's wine and boozing, Ian Robson's cheeky take on TV, Tony Hitchens on rubbish and recycling and Robert Weatherall's reviews of the news.

Recent comments

Recent Posts

Sponsored links

Feeds

  • Add to:
  • icongoogle.gif
  • iconyahoo.gif
  • iconbloglines.gif
  • iconaol.gif

Tackle Knife Crime Through Martial Arts

Posted by Phil Doherty on May 29, 2008 12:59 PM | 

By Guest Blogger Peter Seth, 3rd Dan Aikido.

Knives! Horrible things in the hands of fools!

In fact it does not even have to be a knife, almost anything can be employed to intimidate, terrorise, wound and kill. It is the individuals not the weapons they use which must be the priority in addressing the present violence sweeping the country.

Apart from the criminal element and the perpetuation of violence for gain, the other main area is the violence that seems to be prevalent and increasing amongst the youth in this country.

With youngsters, both male and female as young as nine up to the age of early 20s and sometimes beyond, being involved in nasty and sometimes deadly violence how do we address the issues?.

By education.

This is by far the most important factor in controlling violent behaviour.

But the youngsters most likely to use violence and carry weapons are usually the least likely to respond to traditional education.

As a practicing martial artist (who has worked within the traditional education system) may I suggest that one way could be that martial arts should be included in the national curriculum (even if it is outside of school hours).

In Japan where this system operates there is virtually no violent crime compared to this country.

I know from experience the personal and social benefits good martial arts training imbues in the individual; respect, confidence, fitness, goal setting, tolerance, team work, good work ethic, and so it goes on.

It may also alter the general impression of martial arts as learning to be violent instead of the real goal of martial arts which is to improve the individual character.

Weapons, especially knives, are readily available anywhere, but as previously mentioned it is the individual which is the main element in violence and this should be taken into account.

A positive sustained policy of stop and search when the carrying of weapons is suspected is essential as is more rigorous prosecution of the sanctions available.

Let those intent on violent acts realise there will be serious consequences - mandatory minimum sentences for the unlawful possession of weapons with intent.

It has been suggested that army-style boot camps should be set up to give the yobs a glimpse of real discipline and to generate some idea of respect.

Maybe’s this a good idea.

Mankind is designed at its most basic to be violent, but there are many factors that come into play which control its use. Some are regularly quoted in the face of the many incidents that occur such as poverty, crime, alcohol, drugs, breakdown of the family, stress etc. Which are all valid factors that must be addressed.

But there are more basic human traits that directly influence violent behaviour. Resources, tribalism, gangs, peer pressure, ego, greed, status, need to dominate (power) which gives you more access to available resources. This could come under the heading of various levels of the natural survival instinct.

There are also the psychopaths and sociopaths who have no grasp of civilised or moral behaviour whose violence can be random and without reason.

But, in the main, the bulk of society want to live a peaceful life.

Just reiterating some previous blogs in case genuine martial artists get caught up in the present 'focus' on violence.

Training to defend your self!

Does anyone actually know how a martial artist would fair if they defend themselves?

With the perceived misconceptions the media and the authorities seem to have (or manipulate for whatever reason) how are martial artists actually seen/viewed in a fracas situation?

I’ve heard in the past about a 'six month veteran' at karate who was involved in an 'incident' and the media had him down as an expert who used his 'great skill' on some poor thugs who attacked him. Not sure of the outcome but he didn’t get good press due to his 'vast' marts experience. (a whole 6 months – can’t even walk properly in that time!)

Are martial artists penalised for trying to learn to control violence and make themselves better citizens etc?

Do we immediately become cast as aggressive, violent people? Does it actually make a difference to the authorities and how do they really view it? After all the police are trained in arrest, restraint, armed (to various degrees) tactics etc. Does that make them martial artists? Some of this is tongue in cheek but also serious - would be great if someone from the media or authorities could give their take on the subject.

Intervention!
Until the law is clarified and common sense and moral justice is considered it is a very dodgy thing to intervene - the police are only too happy to 'apply' the 'law' AGAINST the good citizen. Its a very easy point or two on the target board and a lot easier than dealing with a pack of yobs.

Especially if the good citizen has a smattering of martial arts experience, after all we are all experts eh? There is no incentive to be a good citizen if you risk arrest for doing so. A great shame that in this once proud country the nice guys are on the run.

There’s lots of talk from the yoof lobby but how about some positive action - lets try address the problems. It’s a fact that teenagers are or can be in the right conditions the most dangerous sector of society as they have not developed empathy, have poor moral limits and have poor perception of boundaries.

You are much more likely to be killed by young 'yobs' than by older age groups.

What are the limits good citizens can go to defend themselves legally????

Comments (6)

Searcher wrote...

Who is this crazy bloke Doherty? Hom many more psychopathic ninjas does the Sunday Sun employ as journos?!

Posted by: Searcher  | May 30, 2008 4:24 PM

Anonymous wrote...

I pretty much agree with Peter on most of his statements. My personal feeling is that the laws are too soft and the youth of today and they are aware of this. Most of them are fully aware of just how far they can go within the confines of the law and as a result do not fear the law. It will be unfair to label all of the youth of the UK the same, but most of them do not show any respect for anyone or anything.

Boot camps, are they the answer? Even if they're not I'd put my services forward as a guard or warden. With six years in the forces I am sure I could use some of my experiances to shape them into model citizens. In reality though it's a shame some of today's youth feel the need to carry a weapon for safety or to look cool in front of their mates. By carrying a bladed weapon their more likely to be injured by using the weapon in difficult situation just to feel safe.

Having taught knife defence in the martial arts and street fighting classes I know that not even the best trained fighter or martial artist can predict a successfull outcome whilst fighting someone with a knife. Best defence, run like hell.

As for jumping in to help someone in trouble during a fight, I would only intervine if I realy had to. Have actualy done this and petes right, once the police find out your a trained martial artist you stop beign a good citizen to someone who just wanted to show of his skills.

Society today is on the decline in my opinion in many areas not just knife crime with our feral youths, unemployment, peer pressure, alcohol to available to minors. I am ashamed to say it but I look after my own now, my family, my home and my possesions. If anyone threatens them I will use my own judgement to deal with the situation. I actually would not like to be a police officer in today's society, two hours of work, six hours of paperwork. Police should be out on the beat, not behind a desk all day.

Posted by: Anonymous  | May 30, 2008 4:51 PM

Robin wrote...

I think a number of crucial points are raised within Peter's blog entry.

Indeed, he is correct to identify the problem of escaliting violence in British society with people predominantly of the under-30 group. Although I believe British society to have become a whole lot less violent in the past 100 hundred years (especially with a concentration on collective violence in response to unpopular social and political environments), there has been a distinctive slide towards more sporadic acts fo violence perpetrated by young people. It is the significant change in the type of violence (clearly directed to sporadic) and the demographics of those who commit it (a far high clustering in the youth area) that has been so noticeable, not an increase in violence as such.

Education is, of course, key to tackling this problem. The alternative would be Orwellian levels of surveillance and control, and a drastically increased police force and beauraucracy. However, I believe that it is crucial to alter education directed towards changing attitudes of young people to a much younger time- ideally from the age of three or four. Given the general widening of the social divide in Britain, and the importance fo early development in intelligence and psychology, leaving anti-violence education to the time people are teenagers is virtually pointless. Likewise, the National Curriculum should be made less morally objective. Although I do not like the idea of a government standardising notions of morality, with regards to violent crimes, it would appear that this would significantly help.

Lastly, there must be a greater legal support for those who resist violent youth crime. News reports the other day of a mother who turned her sons in for a violent attack they had made on a man that had left him blinded illustrated this well: the police merely commended the bravery of the mother despite threats from her sons. It is no wonder that so many acts of random violence happen when there is no encouragement or protection offered to those who take a stand against it. Harsher senteances for perpetrators, more sympathetic self-defence laws and greater police protection for witnesses and community observers are essential.

How do people feel about such proposals?

Posted by: Robin  | May 31, 2008 3:24 PM

phil doherty wrote...

Hello Searcher in answer to your question the Sunday Sun employs two psychopathic martial artists as journos.
But we are the only sane ones on the news desk!

Posted by: phil doherty  | May 31, 2008 3:57 PM

What yay lukin at! wrote...

Hi all.
just wondering if like me is your sense of perspective on violence, your own personal reaction if confronted, the way you would deal with a situation etc. How would you temper your reaction depending on the threat - eg: one on one, or a mob of 'hoodies' surround you. Is it a 'life or death' situation? Do you use your expertise to just 'control' the threat or view it as the americans say 'with extreme prejudice'. I may be 'out of perspective' but I fear if you hold back you may find you will not survive and 'we' do not deserve this living in trepidation and fear. What right have these thugs got to interfere with the right of others to go about in peace - maybe they deserve all that the innocent guys inflict on them without all their excuses and the cries of the PC/do gooder brigade.
What you think?


Posted by: What yay lukin at!  | June 4, 2008 1:11 PM

Anteaus wrote...

I just wonder how much responsibility society itself must accept for youth unrest?

Many of the local shops are now displaying ageist policy-notices demanding ID cards from persons under 25. This is not because the shops want to do this, but because of concerns over prosecution if they let even one under-18 slip through the net.

Seems to me that they youth of today have good reason to be angry about this. It is no differerent in principle from the kind of humiliations that women, africans and jews have suffered at various times and places in the past.

A person over 18 is legally a full adult, and should not have to tolerate being treated as a second-class citizen.

I think if I was under 25 today, I would feel like Bruce Lee did when he encountered the "No Dogs or Chinese" notice.

Posted by: Anteaus  | June 7, 2008 5:01 PM

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)