Best Self Defense to learn for over 40

Arthur said:
My own view is that in today's world the chances are >90% that an assailant will be armed with knife, gun or stick. Krav Mega/Jujutsu/karate/ma ain't gonna help me much in that situation...

By all means do it for exercise and fun. But it's a self-defence dead-end.
Click to expand...
Capoeira is the right thing then.
They'll think you're dancing for them, until they feel the round the house kick
 
Arthur said:
The time, effort and expense needed for this over-40 male to get proficient at Krav Maga is just not worth it, tbh
Click to expand...
Dunno hey, I found Krav very easy to pick up, most new students reach some level of proficiency within a couple of months max, even those who never trained in any self defense before.

For a 40+ male the only concern I'd think worth mentioning is risk of injury. The training is necessarily and intentionally violent, I got fresh bruises pretty much every week, it does take a toll on your body.
 
Bobbin said:
Karate = straight lines.
Kung-fu = circles.

That's basically how I personally distinguish the two and generalize aside from the obvious belt/rank differences and origins (Just my own interpretation, I could be wrong :o).

Otherwise nothing wrong with either. Go with Chuck Norris or Bruce Lee.

There's also Muay Thai if OP want's to kick banana trees all day long :D J/K. Tony Jaa style.
Click to expand...


Kung fu PR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I

vs reality


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUOXGQ0MqP0
 
Splinter said:
Kung fu PR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I

vs reality

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUOXGQ0MqP0
Click to expand...

What a load of cr@p.
The first video isnt Chinese in origin, its Japanese :rolleyes:

Gongfu or Kung Fu simply means 'great skill through hard work'. A musician, or artist, or champion sportsman can all have good Gongfu.
If one has bad Gongfu it simply means they havent put enough effort into their endeavour.

If you want to do an activity with some Martial Arts foundation, there are many to choose from.
If you want a traditional Martial Art with lineage, history and substance, there are very few.

The one is a sport, the other a lifetime commitment and a way of life where everything else from family to work comes second.
Understand the difference and know what you want.

Most importantly, how much time you are willing to spend pursuing which ever one you choose.
The effectiveness of what you learn is always in direct correlation to the amount of time spent doing it.
 
Werfetter said:
I agree that knife and gun defense is not touched. But let us be honest, how often will you actually be able to get close enough to defend against a gun if the guy holding it wants you dead? If you do get close enough he did not want you dead to start off with so stay the F*** back and don't be a hero. Doing anything in that situation just endangers lives.

The bar fight scenario I get. I am not saying go to ground with the guy and grapple like a bunch of horny teenage wrestlers. I mean, don't get pinned, get the ********* off of you and get yourself away from the danger. I posted earlier that the most important thing about self defense is NOT getting into a fight but rather being able to get away from it or even better avoid it completely. Go for the eyes, groin or throat and when he lets off, get out.

Honestly nothing will be a one size fits all approach. I think for self defense MMA builds a great platform and at least you get your teeth rattled so you build a little confidence in yourself.

On that note, fight club gym anyone? :crylaugh:
Click to expand...

We're on the same page

Arthur said:
The time, effort and expense needed for this over-40 male to get proficient at Krav Maga is just not worth it, tbh. Especially when it might only be useful in <10% of reasonably foreseeable situations.

Still, it sounds awesome. Good luck to those who go for it.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Krav Maga was developed and is used in the Israeli Army for hand-to-hand combat. Is is specifically to gain the most proficiency in the shortest time. Your average soldier (or rather your average person, since prescription is still in force in Israel) has no martial arts experience before going into the army. The primary means of combat is obviously not hand-to-hand, but a basic level of proficiency is required for those 'in-case' scenarios.

KM doesn't have kata to learn, or fancy moves. It's about using whatever you have available (fists, knees, head, feet etc) with maximum aggression. Emphasis on the maximum aggression. So it's perfect for any age to become as proficient as possible in the shortest time.
 
eehellfire said:
Incorrect. Krav Maga was developed and is used in the Israeli Army for hand-to-hand combat. Is is specifically to gain the most proficiency in the shortest time. Your average soldier (or rather your average person, since prescription is still in force in Israel) has no martial arts experience before going into the army. The primary means of combat is obviously not hand-to-hand, but a basic level of proficiency is required for those 'in-case' scenarios.

KM doesn't have kata to learn, or fancy moves. It's about using whatever you have available (fists, knees, head, feet etc) with maximum aggression. Emphasis on the maximum aggression. So it's perfect for any age to become as proficient as possible in the shortest time.
Click to expand...
So how does that make my comment incorrect? Surely I'm the best judge of what is worth my time and trouble - or do you have some special insight? There are no objective and universal rules at issue.

Besides, as a reasonably able plus-40 male I still have some ability to move arms, legs and head in an emergency. Oh, and like many of my peers, I spent two years in Infantry, incl 9 months in Infantry School. We also had conscription (not prescription).

Now my .45 ACP makes up for my lack of KM. It's right for me.
 
Krav Maga - Disable your opponent as quickly as possible, by whatever means. This includes gouging of eyes, etc.
 
eehellfire said:
Incorrect. Krav Maga was developed and is used in the Israeli Army for hand-to-hand combat. Is is specifically to gain the most proficiency in the shortest time. Your average soldier (or rather your average person, since prescription is still in force in Israel) has no martial arts experience before going into the army. The primary means of combat is obviously not hand-to-hand, but a basic level of proficiency is required for those 'in-case' scenarios.
Click to expand...

Actually Krav Maga was developed to enabled the Jewish community to defend themselves during the war against anti-semetic soldier who gave them trouble, so whilst it was never developed for them, it was adopted by the Israeli army when Imi S'dor was made head instructor in the military , but your point remains valid. It is relatively easy to learn, and requires little effort to become proficient (to an extent) in its effectiveness.
 
garp said:
A firearm can provide a false sense of security. It is practically useless in close quarters or in a crowd or confined space. Think about the time it would take an attacker coming at you with a knife to cover 21 feet (6.4 metres) vs the time it will take you to draw a weapon, take the safety off, aim and fire accurately, all while you're in a state of blind panic. 21 feet is the estimated average distance a knife-wielding attacker will cover in the time it takes you to draw a gun.
Click to expand...

No no no no no no no no.

If you're serious about your safety, get a serious tool to defend yourself. Yes, CQC training helps, A LOT, but if you think it takes that long to draw a gun or you think that a firearm is "practically useless in close quarters", the problem is with YOU and you should not project that fear onto other people. Since the first time I've had a firearm I've been able to draw and fire two shots at target on a random timer in under 1.4 seconds. Include turning around to a blind target (don't know where it is) and that time is still around the 2 second mark. Firearms doesn't save lives, training with them does. Just having it and leaving it in the safe doesn't save lives, you need to CARRY it, TRAIN with it and be PREPARED to use it.

Whoever wants to seriously get their training on, book a self-defense shooter's course with Terrick Naude. He's turned many "tiny women who can't shoot a high-powered gun" people into seriously dangerous victims.
 
Toxxyc said:
No no no no no no no no.

If you're serious about your safety, get a serious tool to defend yourself. Yes, CQC training helps, A LOT, but if you think it takes that long to draw a gun or you think that a firearm is "practically useless in close quarters", the problem is with YOU and you should not project that fear onto other people. Since the first time I've had a firearm I've been able to draw and fire two shots at target on a random timer in under 1.4 seconds. Include turning around to a blind target (don't know where it is) and that time is still around the 2 second mark. Firearms doesn't save lives, training with them does. Just having it and leaving it in the safe doesn't save lives, you need to CARRY it, TRAIN with it and be PREPARED to use it.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure someone can cover 5m and stab you in under 1.4s too... Definitely in under 2s. So you might get a shot off but you'll also get stabbed not exactly winning that engagement.
 
Jehosefat said:
I'm pretty sure someone can cover 5m and stab you in under 1.4s too... Definitely in under 2s. So you might get a shot off but you'll also get stabbed not exactly winning that engagement.
Click to expand...

No rules that say you need to stand still whilst drawing and firing ;)
 
Jehosefat said:
I'm pretty sure someone can cover 5m and stab you in under 1.4s too... Definitely in under 2s. So you might get a shot off but you'll also get stabbed not exactly winning that engagement.
Click to expand...
In the real world it's not an either-or situation. A person with a pistol still has arms and legs and muscles and stuff.
 
Arthur said:
So how does that make my comment incorrect? Surely I'm the best judge of what is worth my time and trouble - or do you have some special insight? There are no objective and universal rules at issue.

Besides, as a reasonably able plus-40 male I still have some ability to move arms, legs and head in an emergency. Oh, and like many of my peers, I spent two years in Infantry, incl 9 months in Infantry School. We also had conscription (not prescription).

Now my .45 ACP makes up for my lack of KM. It's right for me.
Click to expand...

Heheh!

Or a "Do you feel lucky hand gun.......", even if it has no bullets in it.

:D
 
srothman said:
No rules that say you need to stand still whilst drawing and firing ;)
Click to expand...

Arthur said:
In the real world it's not an either-or situation. A person with a pistol still has arms and legs and muscles and stuff.
Click to expand...

I never said you couldn't. I'm just saying that at short range it's not as cut-and-dried as gun=good knife=bad. In fact I remember reading a military study a while back that found that knives beat guns at distances up to about 6m on average. That is, at distances over 6m the guy with the gun "won" more often and at distances less than 6m the guy with the knife "won" more often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X