26 Nov 2007 20:31:58
Rabid Weasel
WOTT - Weapons disarms

Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):

Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
and why.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk
--
FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



27 Nov 2007 08:06:16
Shuurai
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote:
> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>
> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> and why.

I would have to guess that the most dangerous weapon to disarm would
be a poorly shielded nuclear warhead, perhaps followed by various
biological weapons.


27 Nov 2007 11:49:00
suds mcduff
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Rabid Weasel wrote:
> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>
> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> and why.
>
> Peace favor your sword (IH),
>
> Kirk
>

----A mortar squad is a PIA to disarm.....


27 Nov 2007 10:19:55
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote
> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> and why.

All of them have their own difficulties-
I don't like disarming heavy clubs- interrupting the swing is dangerous at
most any point- tethered to the hand in some way makes them more difficult
as well.
I don't like going against a spear- it commands a lot of 'front', and the
whole weapon is dangerous.
Swords are hard; all of them. Sharp is a bitch, and 3 ft. of blade for the
whole arc of movement is hard to beat.
Knives are hard as hell- they're short, sharp, hard, gripped well and the
wounds are serious.
Flexible/composite weapons require 'disarming' at several junctures, perhaps
on different planes.
Obviously, projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have to
be close to 'dis-arm'.
--
Chas
http://www.jacksandsaps.com/




27 Nov 2007 17:37:11
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net >
wrote:

>"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote
>> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
>> and why.
>
>All of them have their own difficulties-
>I don't like disarming heavy clubs- interrupting the swing is dangerous at
>most any point- tethered to the hand in some way makes them more difficult
>as well.
>I don't like going against a spear- it commands a lot of 'front', and the
>whole weapon is dangerous.
>Swords are hard; all of them. Sharp is a bitch, and 3 ft. of blade for the
>whole arc of movement is hard to beat.
>Knives are hard as hell- they're short, sharp, hard, gripped well and the
>wounds are serious.
>Flexible/composite weapons require 'disarming' at several junctures, perhaps
>on different planes.
>Obviously, projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have to
>be close to 'dis-arm'.

I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
way to be sure.

>--
>Chas
>http://www.jacksandsaps.com/
>
>



27 Nov 2007 12:46:47
David L. Burkhead
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

<hal@nospam.org > wrote in message
news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote
> >> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to
disarm
> >> and why.
> >
> >All of them have their own difficulties-
> >I don't like disarming heavy clubs- interrupting the swing is dangerous
at
> >most any point- tethered to the hand in some way makes them more
difficult
> >as well.
> >I don't like going against a spear- it commands a lot of 'front', and the
> >whole weapon is dangerous.
> >Swords are hard; all of them. Sharp is a bitch, and 3 ft. of blade for
the
> >whole arc of movement is hard to beat.
> >Knives are hard as hell- they're short, sharp, hard, gripped well and the
> >wounds are serious.
> >Flexible/composite weapons require 'disarming' at several junctures,
perhaps
> >on different planes.
> >Obviously, projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have
to
> >be close to 'dis-arm'.
>
> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
> way to be sure.

Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com-- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays





27 Nov 2007 09:48:45
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote:
> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>
> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> and why.

Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


27 Nov 2007 17:48:58
Pboud
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

David L. Burkhead wrote:
> <hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
> news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have
> to
>>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>> way to be sure.
>
> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>
Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.

:)


27 Nov 2007 09:56:36
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> David L. Burkhead wrote:
> > <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
> >news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
> >> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
> >>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
> >> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
> >> way to be sure.
>
> > Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>
> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.

Obscure?

Pierre


27 Nov 2007 09:59:38
Shuurai
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 12:19 pm, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net > wrote:
> "Rabid Weasel" <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote
>
> > Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> > and why.
>
> All of them have their own difficulties-
> I don't like disarming heavy clubs- interrupting the swing is dangerous at
> most any point- tethered to the hand in some way makes them more difficult
> as well.

Same goes for axes, hammers, and the like. I suppose baseball bats
for a more likely to happen example. Your best hope is to either stay
entirely out of range (which sort of negates the whole 'disarm'
aspect) or to get very close and make contact soas to stop them from
swinging the weapon with force. Going in after they swing is a
possibility.

> I don't like going against a spear- it commands a lot of 'front', and the
> whole weapon is dangerous.

Very true - it ain't just the pointy bit you've got to worry about. A
lot of people make the assumption that spears and staves (including
the bo) are only effective as long range weapon. Bad assumption. You
can put a lot of hurt into someone at very close range if you know
what you're doing.

> Swords are hard; all of them. Sharp is a bitch, and 3 ft. of blade for the
> whole arc of movement is hard to beat.

Lots of varieties of swords, too. For the bigger ones, you might be
able to get inside and make contact with the opponents body to prevent
him from getting a swing. Dangerous as hell, but that kinda goes
along with being in a sword fight.

> Knives are hard as hell- they're short, sharp, hard, gripped well and the
> wounds are serious.

A good knifer might be the hardest of all to disarm; the weapon is
intended for the exactly range you need to be in to disarm him.

> Flexible/composite weapons require 'disarming' at several junctures, perhaps
> on different planes.

The only weapon in this category I've really disarmed is the nunchaku
- basically you go for the arm holding the weapon.

> Obviously, projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have to
> be close to 'dis-arm'.




27 Nov 2007 11:02:31
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Badger North" <young_forest@hotmail.com > wrote
> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.

I have.
Numerous times against various weapons.
Sorry I didn't have a video-camera with me, and was busy at the time anyway.

--
Chas
http://www.jacksandsaps.com/




27 Nov 2007 13:04:44
Jerry B. Altzman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

on 2007-11-27 12:48 Pboud said the following:
> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>> <hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
>> news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have
>> to
>>>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>> way to be sure.
>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.

Obscure? Daym! I use that line at least once a week.

//jbaltz
--
jerry b. altzman jbaltz@altzman.com www.jbaltz.com
thank you for contributing to the heat death of the universe.


27 Nov 2007 18:10:48
Pboud
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Pierre Honeyman wrote:
> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>>> <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
>>> news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
>>>> wrote:
>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
>>>>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>>> way to be sure.
>>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>
> Obscure?
>
> Pierre
Unless you happen to be a fan, of course :)


27 Nov 2007 18:12:44
Pboud
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Jerry B. Altzman wrote:
> on 2007-11-27 12:48 Pboud said the following:
>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>>> <hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
>>> news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net>
>>>> wrote:
>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have
>>> to
>>>>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>>> way to be sure.
>>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>
> Obscure? Daym! I use that line at least once a week.
>
> //jbaltz
Well ExcUUse me!! :P

That's what I get for not watching TV these days.. I loose track of
what's on the space channel :D


27 Nov 2007 10:15:16
Shuurai
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 12:48 pm, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>
> > Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>
> > Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> > and why.
>
> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.

I've seen a bunch of them; all the time actually. They usually come
out right after it rains.


27 Nov 2007 10:19:11
Shuurai
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


> >>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
> >>>> way to be sure.

> >>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
> >> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.

> > Obscure?

> Unless you happen to be a fan, of course :)

If you're a fan you realize it didn't work :b


27 Nov 2007 18:37:21
Pboud
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Shuurai wrote:
>>>>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>>>>> way to be sure.
>
>>>>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>
>>> Obscure?
>
>> Unless you happen to be a fan, of course :)
>
> If you're a fan you realize it didn't work :b
Yeah, but that was fixed with the movie guy...


27 Nov 2007 11:07:06
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 1:02 pm, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net > wrote:
> "Badger North" <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> > Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> > look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>
> I have.
> Numerous times against various weapons.
> Sorry I didn't have a video-camera with me, and was busy at the time anyway.

Geez, I thought unicorns only appeared to virgins...

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


27 Nov 2007 23:10:53
Grimm Riffer
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Badger North" <young_forest@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:4db44f1a-888e-433b-91d8-aa6de3fd683e@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>>
>> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to
>> disarm
>> and why.
>
> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>
> Badger North
> www.youngforest.ca

I saw a brilliant knife disarm. The trick, it seems, is to be holding a
tyre iron...




27 Nov 2007 23:12:32
Pboud
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Grimm Riffer wrote:
> "Badger North" <young_forest@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4db44f1a-888e-433b-91d8-aa6de3fd683e@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
>> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>>> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>>>
>>> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to
>>> disarm
>>> and why.
>> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
>> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>>
>> Badger North
>> www.youngforest.ca
>
> I saw a brilliant knife disarm. The trick, it seems, is to be holding a
> tyre iron...
>
>
You know, it's the little things that make this NG so useful...


27 Nov 2007 19:06:52
David L. Burkhead
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Badger North wrote:
> On Nov 27, 1:02 pm, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> "Badger North" <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>
>>> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
>>> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>>
>> I have.
>> Numerous times against various weapons.
>> Sorry I didn't have a video-camera with me, and was busy at the time
>> anyway.
>
> Geez, I thought unicorns only appeared to virgins...

Well, yeah, after which they're not virgins any more. (What did you _think_
the horn was for?)

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com-- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays





27 Nov 2007 16:04:06
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>
> > Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>
> > Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
> > and why.
>
> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.

The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.

Pierre


27 Nov 2007 20:56:21
David L. Burkhead
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Pierre Honeyman wrote:
> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Weekly On Topic Thread (WOTT):
>>
>>> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to
>>> disarm and why.
>>
>> Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
>> look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>
> The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
> train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
> they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
> solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.

People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--train weapon disarms
because if you need them, well, a very low probability of success is still
better than the zerio percent probability of success that results from doing
nothing.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com-- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays





28 Nov 2007 10:56:58
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Pboud" <pboud_01NOSPAMAT@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:eMY2j.32636$Zn.28598@edtnps90...
> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>> <hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
>> news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have
>> to
>>>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>> way to be sure.
>>
>> Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>
> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>
> :)

Aliens??????? Obscure?????? You take that back.

Fraser





28 Nov 2007 03:59:36
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"David L. Burkhead" <dburkhead@sff.net > wrote in message
news:QsadnVYlBMqxVdHanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@giganews.com...

> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--train weapon disarms
> because if you need them, well, a very low probability of success is still
> better than the zero percent probability of success that results from doing
> nothing.

True dat....unless of course you are Wayne Dobson, who can kill skilled
knife-wielding assailants in his Killing Zone (tm).

I'm been trying hard, in the absence of any details from the elf, to work out how
this amazing technique works.

I think it has to do with halitosis.

Any better suggestions?
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"




28 Nov 2007 02:31:43
wallen
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On your knees! Drop your weapon! Hands in the air !! it aint that
hard.......

he he he

Kidding aside, they are all hard to dis-arm. thats why they are there,
to give the person holding it an edge over the enemy.

my personal opinion- the hardest to disarm is the Rice gathering tool
(karit). it is short ranged like a knife, but because of its reversed
serrated curved blade, it can cut you even as you hold the oponents
weapon holding hand.



28 Nov 2007 05:15:42
Rabid Weasel
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, Chas wrote:

> "Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote
>> Weapons disarms - Rank what weaposn are most difficult/dangerous to disarm
>> and why.
>
> All of them have their own difficulties-
> I don't like disarming heavy clubs- interrupting the swing is dangerous at
> most any point- tethered to the hand in some way makes them more difficult
> as well.
> I don't like going against a spear- it commands a lot of 'front', and the
> whole weapon is dangerous.
> Swords are hard; all of them. Sharp is a bitch, and 3 ft. of blade for the
> whole arc of movement is hard to beat.
> Knives are hard as hell- they're short, sharp, hard, gripped well and the
> wounds are serious.
> Flexible/composite weapons require 'disarming' at several junctures, perhaps
> on different planes.
> Obviously, projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have to
> be close to 'dis-arm'.

Good points. Yes, the spear is greatly misunderstood and clubs are
definitely under-rated by most.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk
--
FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



28 Nov 2007 05:16:54
Rabid Weasel
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:56:36 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:

> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>> > <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
>> >news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>> >> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
>> >>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>> >> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>> >> way to be sure.
>>
>> > Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>
>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>
> Obscure?

I know. It was top grossing movie of that year, which wasn't really that
long ago. It's not like it's a B-grade cult-classic or anything.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



28 Nov 2007 07:09:01
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

You will not take a weapon away from anyone skilled in the use of weapons.
Therefore, the only person that you will be able to take a weapon away from
is some moron that is not skilled in its use.
I would have to rank the knife as very difficult to take away. It is a close
range weapon and you have to be close to get it away from the moron. That
puts you at more risk for an misstep on your part.




28 Nov 2007 07:35:30
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


>
> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
> way to be sure.

But they will just take our nucs away from us.




28 Nov 2007 06:30:38
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, 7:04 pm, Pierre Honeyman <pear...@gmail.com > wrote:

> > Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> > look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>
> The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
> train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
> they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
> solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.

Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.

And sure, I teach disarms and train 'em, but only about 5 per cent of
the total number I've ever been taught, and even then I don't have a
lot of faith in that 5 per cent. Basically I include them as a
"you've got someone in a restricted position, and you want to strip
the weapon away while they figure out just how to get their elbow out
of their own ear" situation.

The vast majority of disarms are happy-go-lucky nerf-world horse shit,
suitable for demo'ing on a compliant partner.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


28 Nov 2007 13:17:29
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote
> Any better suggestions?

Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question is
about how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-
and 'Kill Zone' is roughly analogous to what we call the 'Cigar Dalem'
(Inner Circle).
In the first question, one has to postulate 'surprise' as part of the
scenario. If the 'skilled' knife-fighter knows that he's going to be
defended against by a skilled subject, he'll come in differently than if he
doesn't expect resistance. It's hard to train against someone who knows what
you're going to do, less difficult if they don't. The 'tricks' will almost
always work at least once- and 'once' is all you need in the real world.
The Defensive Circle is the distance of your own body wherein your
techniques are powerful. It's the distance that an opponent has to breach in
order to get to your vitals.
Practicing your kata is the best way to learn your own distancing.

--
Chas
http://www.jacksandsaps.com/




28 Nov 2007 13:20:26
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net > wrote
> You will not take a weapon away from anyone skilled in the use of weapons.

'Surprise' is a great leveler in terms of 'skill'.

> Therefore, the only person that you will be able to take a weapon away
> from is some moron that is not skilled in its use.

Many of whom are just the guys attacking you.

> I would have to rank the knife as very difficult to take away. It is a
> close range weapon and you have to be close to get it away from the moron.
> That puts you at more risk for an misstep on your part.

You were already going to get stabbed, why not take a chance?

--
Chas
http://www.jacksandsaps.com/




28 Nov 2007 21:09:54
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:II53j.17845$CN4.13748@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--train weapon
>> disarms
>> because if you need them, well, a very low probability of success is
>> still
>> better than the zero percent probability of success that results from
>> doing
>> nothing.
>
> True dat....unless of course you are Wayne Dobson, who can kill skilled
> knife-wielding assailants in his Killing Zone (tm).
>
> I'm been trying hard, in the absence of any details from the elf, to work
> out how this amazing technique works.

Dumbass! For all your decades study of martial arts, you still haven't got
a clue.

> I think it has to do with halitosis.

Is the smell of your rotting brain, seeping out of your mouth? Maybe you
could address this problem with some strong mouthwash.

> Any better suggestions?

Maybe if you had your putrifying brain sucked out through one of your ears,
with a sturdy drinking straw, the smell would go away. Just a thought.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




28 Nov 2007 16:41:07
Sam the Bam
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 28, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
> > train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
> > they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
> > solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.
>
> Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.

What is that?


Sam



28 Nov 2007 16:49:23
Sam the Bam
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 27, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net > wrote:
> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--
> train weapon disarms because if you need them, well,
> a very low probability of success is still
> better than the zerio percent probability of success that results
> from doing nothing.

First, that's not clear - "a little knowledge is
dangerous"... it's more likely a little training
actually causes cognitive dissonance as,
under stress, one dithers between what one
should do, vs. one's instincts. It takes a long
time to overcome natural reactions.

Second, I think people train disarms because they
are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
That's more an incentive than "this might save my
life". Except for professionals, who of course
would take it more seriously.


Sam


29 Nov 2007 00:50:52
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:vv2dnWaW4sjfUNDanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote
>> Any better suggestions?
>
> Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question is about
> how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-

So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a knife, bad
intentions on both sides.....

What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?

What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving turkey?

Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy, a HUGE
advantage.

Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an exponent.

That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.

Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when they concede to
the obvious, they are incompetent.

This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done to
him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.

--
GDS

"Let's roll!"




28 Nov 2007 20:32:46
David L. Burkhead
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Sam the Bam wrote:
> On Nov 27, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
>> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--
>> train weapon disarms because if you need them, well,
>> a very low probability of success is still
>> better than the zerio percent probability of success that results
>> from doing nothing.
>
> First, that's not clear - "a little knowledge is
> dangerous"... it's more likely a little training
> actually causes cognitive dissonance as,
> under stress, one dithers between what one
> should do, vs. one's instincts. It takes a long
> time to overcome natural reactions.

That may be true but it has nothing to do with my statement which is
about _why_ to train. All the training in the world isn't going to make a
disarm a high percentage move. But low percentage is better than no
percentage . . . .

> Second, I think people train disarms because they
> are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
> That's more an incentive than "this might save my
> life". Except for professionals, who of course
> would take it more seriously.

Perhaps, but I'm talking about people who are training martial arts, not
interpretive dance.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com-- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays





29 Nov 2007 12:35:30
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote in message
news:pan.2007.11.28.10.16.52.832564@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:56:36 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:
>
>> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>>> > <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
>>> >news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>> >> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
>>> >> wrote:
>>>
>>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
>>> >>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>> >> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>> >> way to be sure.
>>>
>>> > Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>>
>>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>>
>> Obscure?
>
> I know. It was top grossing movie of that year, which wasn't really that
> long ago. It's not like it's a B-grade cult-classic or anything.

It was over 20 years ago. My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.

Fraser





28 Nov 2007 20:11:32
Sam the Bam
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 28, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net > wrote:
> > Second, I think people train disarms because they
> > are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
> > That's more an incentive than "this might save my
> > life". Except for professionals, who of course
> > would take it more seriously.
>
> Perhaps, but I'm talking about people who are
> training martial arts, not interpretive dance.

I'd say the interpretive dance crowd is more
typical... it's a hobby, after all...


Sam


28 Nov 2007 23:08:00
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote
> So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a knife,
> bad intentions on both sides.....

I don't know anything about the guy-
the probability of the scenario happening at all is vanishingly small.
Hell, I don't even think they're friends, and that seems a prerequisite for
Gartin.

Chas




29 Nov 2007 10:38:12
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:M1o3j.18195$CN4.79@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:vv2dnWaW4sjfUNDanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote
>>> Any better suggestions?
>>
>> Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question is
>> about how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-
>
> So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a knife,
> bad intentions on both sides.....

There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they were
empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are an
idiot.

> What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?

What's the odds of my being that stupid?

> What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving turkey?

If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die. I wouldn't even bet a
packet of crips on you.

> Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy, a HUGE
> advantage.

Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which is
most of the time.

> Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an exponent.

What the fuck is it that is eating out your brain? Your own statement
acknowledges that there do exist such people.

> That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.

Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.

> Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when they
> concede to the obvious, they are incompetent.

Your idea of obvious is anything that your cult has programmed into your
brain.

> This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done to
> him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.

I don't see what is false about what I've actually done. That's all I speak
about. You speak about what you wish were true.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 10:43:24
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Sam the Bam" <samthebam1@lycos.com > wrote in message
news:a73155be-23bf-4d02-9095-e3344dca900b@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 27, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
>> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--
>> train weapon disarms because if you need them, well,
>> a very low probability of success is still
>> better than the zerio percent probability of success that results
>> from doing nothing.
>
> First, that's not clear - "a little knowledge is
> dangerous"... it's more likely a little training
> actually causes cognitive dissonance as,
> under stress, one dithers between what one
> should do, vs. one's instincts.

I don't dither under stress. I dither when I'm not under stress. Stress
focusses my mind. I train so that the training becomes my instincts.

> It takes a long time to overcome natural reactions.

It doesn't take a long time to retrain responses, if you do it right. Most
people do it wrong. It's that simple.

> Second, I think people train disarms because they
> are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
> That's more an incentive than "this might save my
> life". Except for professionals, who of course
> would take it more seriously.

The best incentive I can think of is wanting to live through the experience,
if I get attacked with a knife.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 02:49:35
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 7:38 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:M1o3j.18195$CN4.79@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>
>
> > "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:vv2dnWaW4sjfUNDanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote
> >>> Any better suggestions?
>
> >> Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question is
> >> about how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-
>
> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a knife,
> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>
> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they were
> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are an
> idiot.

Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across the
Atlantic) and get a gun"

Your delusions grow deeper....

> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>
> What's the odds of my being that stupid?

Odds on.

> > What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving turkey?
>
> If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die.

In your 'killing zone', eh? ROTFLMAO!!!

> I wouldn't even bet a
> packet of crips on you.

Can't afford the 50p eh, Wayne?

> > Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy, a HUGE
> > advantage.
>
> Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
> consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which is
> most of the time.

I just did, moron...Steve Gartin. He's skilled. Or the guy I trained
knife defenses with.

>
> > Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an exponent.
>
> What the fuck is it that is eating out your brain? Your own statement
> acknowledges that there do exist such people.

Go back and read it all again, Wayne. Your daily quota of ten pints of
warm lager has rotted your tiny brain.

> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>
> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.

Well look at the whingeing troll.

> > Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when they
> > concede to the obvious, they are incompetent.
>
> Your idea of obvious is anything that your cult has programmed into your
> brain.

What cult is that, delusion-boi?

> > This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done to
> > him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.
>
> I don't see what is false about what I've actually done.

What is it that you've actually done? Teach a bunch of soccer moms how
to yell ...Kaaiiii!!

>That's all I speak
> about. You speak about what you wish were true.

You've got nothin' Wayne, nothin' at all.

GDS

"Let's roll!"


29 Nov 2007 10:52:23
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"David L. Burkhead" <dburkhead@sff.net > wrote in message
news:0NydnQ9_T6m5idPanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Sam the Bam wrote:
>> On Nov 27, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
>>> People--aware, informed, reasonably intelligent peole--
>>> train weapon disarms because if you need them, well,
>>> a very low probability of success is still
>>> better than the zerio percent probability of success that results
>>> from doing nothing.
>>
>> First, that's not clear - "a little knowledge is
>> dangerous"... it's more likely a little training
>> actually causes cognitive dissonance as,
>> under stress, one dithers between what one
>> should do, vs. one's instincts. It takes a long
>> time to overcome natural reactions.
>
> That may be true but it has nothing to do with my statement which is
> about _why_ to train. All the training in the world isn't going to make a
> disarm a high percentage move.

All the inept training in the world, yes.

> But low percentage is better than no percentage . . . .

It's not the odds that is the problem, but the stakes.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 11:09:56
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:584e0527-c8ff-4377-8786-faffa6c88c2d@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 7:38 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>
>> news:M1o3j.18195$CN4.79@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

>> > "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> >news:vv2dnWaW4sjfUNDanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote
>> >>> Any better suggestions?
>>
>> >> Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question
>> >> is
>> >> about how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-
>>
>> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a
>> > knife,
>> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>>
>> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they
>> were
>> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are an
>> idiot.
>
> Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across the
> Atlantic) and get a gun"

I'm saying I wouldn't go after such a person with a knife.

> Your delusions grow deeper....



>> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>>
>> What's the odds of my being that stupid?
>
> Odds on.

I've already told you that I'd look for another way, you crackhead.

>> > What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving turkey?
>>
>> If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die.
>
> In your 'killing zone', eh? ROTFLMAO!!!



>> I wouldn't even bet a
>> packet of crips on you.
>
> Can't afford the 50p eh, Wayne?

I can, but why would I throw 50p away? It makes no sense.

>> > Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy, a
>> > HUGE
>> > advantage.
>>
>> Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
>> consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which is
>> most of the time.
>
> I just did, moron...Steve Gartin. He's skilled. Or the guy I trained
> knife defenses with.

Go look up the definition of 'criteria'; I asked for that, not for
instances.

>> > Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an exponent.
>>
>> What the fuck is it that is eating out your brain? Your own statement
>> acknowledges that there do exist such people.
>
> Go back and read it all again, Wayne. Your daily quota of ten pints of
> warm lager has rotted your tiny brain.

You eat a lot of fruit, don't you? I suspect that you don't digest fruit
very well, which is causing it to ferment in your gut and making you act
drunk.

>> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>>
>> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>
> Well look at the whingeing troll.

What, splashed out on a new mirror? Nice.

>> > Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when they
>> > concede to the obvious, they are incompetent.
>>
>> Your idea of obvious is anything that your cult has programmed into your
>> brain.
>
> What cult is that, delusion-boi?

They programmed in amnesia, too?

>> > This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done to
>> > him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.
>>
>> I don't see what is false about what I've actually done.
>
> What is it that you've actually done? Teach a bunch of soccer moms how
> to yell ...Kaaiiii!!

I think that you and Burkhead should team up. You could help him with
storylines for his comic.

>>That's all I speak
>> about. You speak about what you wish were true.
>
> You've got nothin' Wayne, nothin' at all.

Just the reality I live in. However, this is what you think:
http://www.dynagroove.com/fight/GenkRoylerSounds1.avi

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 03:52:18
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 8:09 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:584e0527-c8ff-4377-8786-faffa6c88c2d@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Nov 29, 7:38 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
> >> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>
> >>news:M1o3j.18195$CN4.79@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> > "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:vv2dnWaW4sjfUNDanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> >> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote
> >> >>> Any better suggestions?
>
> >> >> Divorcing the subject from your dislike of Dobson, the only question
> >> >> is
> >> >> about how 'skilled' you posit the opponent to be-
>
> >> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a
> >> > knife,
> >> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>
> >> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they
> >> were
> >> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are an
> >> idiot.
>
> > Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across the
> > Atlantic) and get a gun"
>
> I'm saying I wouldn't go after such a person with a knife.

It's not a situation where you get to make that call.

> > Your delusions grow deeper....
> >> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>
> >> What's the odds of my being that stupid?
>
> > Odds on.
>
> I've already told you that I'd look for another way, you crackhead.

Now you're just lying. You said you could disarm Herb from his Bowie.
You said you can disarm skilled knife wieldling assailants. Now it's
'another way'. That would be backpeddling...something you do well.

> >> > What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving turkey?
>
> >> If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die.
>
> > In your 'killing zone', eh? ROTFLMAO!!!
> >> I wouldn't even bet a
> >> packet of crips on you.
>
> > Can't afford the 50p eh, Wayne?
>
> I can, but why would I throw 50p away? It makes no sense.

You haven't explained why you'd expect me do die if I had the knife.
You don't get off so easily, boy.
>
> >> > Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy, a
> >> > HUGE
> >> > advantage.
>
> >> Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
> >> consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which is
> >> most of the time.
>
> > I just did, moron...Steve Gartin. He's skilled. Or the guy I trained
> > knife defenses with.
>
> Go look up the definition of 'criteria'; I asked for that, not for
> instances.

Rather than provide criteria, I've provided an example...someone who
embodies the criteria. So now we have the semantics out of the way,
tell us all how you're going to disarm Steve Gartin or Herb Cannon and
then kill them.

> >> > Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an exponent.
>
> >> What the fuck is it that is eating out your brain? Your own statement
> >> acknowledges that there do exist such people.
>
> > Go back and read it all again, Wayne. Your daily quota of ten pints of
> > warm lager has rotted your tiny brain.
>
> You eat a lot of fruit, don't you? I suspect that you don't digest fruit
> very well, which is causing it to ferment in your gut and making you act
> drunk.

How are you going to do it,Wayne?

> >> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>
> >> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>
> > Well look at the whingeing troll.
>
> What, splashed out on a new mirror? Nice.

How are you going to do it,Wayne?
>
> >> > Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when they
> >> > concede to the obvious, they are incompetent.
>
> >> Your idea of obvious is anything that your cult has programmed into your
> >> brain.
>
> > What cult is that, delusion-boi?
>
> They programmed in amnesia, too?

How are you going to do it,Wayne?

> >> > This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done to
> >> > him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.
>
> >> I don't see what is false about what I've actually done.
>
> > What is it that you've actually done? Teach a bunch of soccer moms how
> > to yell ...Kaaiiii!!
>
> I think that you and Burkhead should team up. You could help him with
> storylines for his comic.

How are you going to do it,Wayne?

> >>That's all I speak
> >> about. You speak about what you wish were true.
>
> > You've got nothin' Wayne, nothin' at all.
>
> Just the reality I live in.

How are you going to do it,Wayne?

GDS

"Let's roll!"


29 Nov 2007 06:13:00
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:7fudneBBDfduUNDanZ2dnUVZ_s-pnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net> wrote
>> You will not take a weapon away from anyone skilled in the use of
>> weapons.
>
> 'Surprise' is a great leveler in terms of 'skill'.

Which works both ways and is a large part of skill. For instance, the mere
drawing of a sword should be done so that the enemy does not know which cut
will be used by you. Surprise!
>
>> Therefore, the only person that you will be able to take a weapon away
>> from is some moron that is not skilled in its use.
>
> Many of whom are just the guys attacking you.

No argument there.
>
>> I would have to rank the knife as very difficult to take away. It is a
>> close range weapon and you have to be close to get it away from the
>> moron. That puts you at more risk for an misstep on your part.
>
> You were already going to get stabbed, why not take a chance?
>
Unless you have a choice?




29 Nov 2007 06:17:31
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


>
> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they were
> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are an
> idiot.

The wont let you have one there.
>
>> What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>
> What's the odds of my being that stupid?

Well there is a glimmer of hope for you.
>
> I don't see what is false about what I've actually done. That's all I
> speak about. You speak about what you wish were true.

Uh oh it just went out.




29 Nov 2007 07:43:15
David L. Burkhead
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Sam the Bam wrote:
> On Nov 28, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
>>> Second, I think people train disarms because they
>>> are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
>>> That's more an incentive than "this might save my
>>> life". Except for professionals, who of course
>>> would take it more seriously.
>>
>> Perhaps, but I'm talking about people who are
>> training martial arts, not interpretive dance.
>
> I'd say the interpretive dance crowd is more
> typical... it's a hobby, after all...

Even most of the "interpretive dance" crowd believes they are training
"real" techniques that they can really apply if faced with the appropriate
situation. It's not whether they're right which determines martial arts vs.
interpretive dance (as I define the terms in this context), but their
intent.

If there's not at least some thought that "I may never face a situation
like this, but if I do...." then it's not MA, not for that person, no matter
what the sign on the door says.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com-- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays





29 Nov 2007 12:44:58
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net > wrote in message
news:j1y3j.4239$ZF7.3425@newsfe21.lga...
>
> "Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:7fudneBBDfduUNDanZ2dnUVZ_s-pnZ2d@comcast.com...

>>> I would have to rank the knife as very difficult to take away. It is a
>>> close range weapon and you have to be close to get it away from the
>>> moron. That puts you at more risk for an misstep on your part.
>>
>> You were already going to get stabbed, why not take a chance?
>>
> Unless you have a choice?

You persist with that strawman. When have you ever heard anyone here say
that they would choose to put themselves at such a disadvantage? I don't
ever hearing such a thing, in the years I've been here. Even if it was an
obscure reference, I expect that the inevitable widespread howls of derision
would have drawn my attention to it.

The whole lot of you would have ridden the life out of that horse. Years
later, it would still be spoken of, as in Hal's alleged comment about a
knife being taken away and used against you. Yet I see no such parallel, in
this instance. You lie.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 12:47:36
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"David L. Burkhead" <dburkhead@sff.net > wrote in message
news:1KCdnefbYK7ULNPanZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Sam the Bam wrote:
>> On Nov 28, "David L. Burkhead" <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
>>>> Second, I think people train disarms because they
>>>> are fun and interesting, for curiosity and variety.
>>>> That's more an incentive than "this might save my
>>>> life". Except for professionals, who of course
>>>> would take it more seriously.
>>>
>>> Perhaps, but I'm talking about people who are
>>> training martial arts, not interpretive dance.
>>
>> I'd say the interpretive dance crowd is more
>> typical... it's a hobby, after all...
>
> Even most of the "interpretive dance" crowd believes they are training
> "real" techniques that they can really apply if faced with the appropriate
> situation. It's not whether they're right which determines martial arts
> vs.
> interpretive dance (as I define the terms in this context), but their
> intent.
>
> If there's not at least some thought that "I may never face a situation
> like this, but if I do...." then it's not MA, not for that person, no
> matter
> what the sign on the door says.

Could you translate that last bit into English, so that those of us who are
not native Gibberish speakers could know what you mean?

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 12:48:51
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:4f2535df-2853-4413-922b-e803be2909f4@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>> >> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a
>> >> > knife,
>> >> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>>
>> >> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they
>> >> were
>> >> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are
>> >> an
>> >> idiot.
>>
>> > Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across the
>> > Atlantic) and get a gun"
>>
>> I'm saying I wouldn't go after such a person with a knife.
>
> It's not a situation where you get to make that call.

It's a situation I wouldn't put myself in. You, however, think anyone with
a knife, whom you've arbritrarely labelled 'skilled,' is invincible against
anyone unarmed. You'd likely put yourself in the position, and die.

>> > Your delusions grow deeper....
>> >> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>>
>> >> What's the odds of my being that stupid?
>>
>> > Odds on.
>>
>> I've already told you that I'd look for another way, you crackhead.
>
> Now you're just lying. You said you could disarm Herb from his Bowie.

I said no such thing. You need to learn to read.

> You said you can disarm skilled knife wieldling assailants.

I said it depends on the level of skill. You've have stubbornly refused to
even attempt to define 'skilled,' as you don't have a clue what such a
judgement would be based on, as you are a Gracie sock-puppet, without a mind
of your own.

> Now it's 'another way'. That would be backpeddling...something you do
> well.

On the rare occasions when I am wrong, I alter my position and I don't have
a problem with that. You, however, lie.

>> >> > What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving
>> >> > turkey?
>>
>> >> If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die.
>>
>> > In your 'killing zone', eh? ROTFLMAO!!!
>> >> I wouldn't even bet a
>> >> packet of crips on you.
>>
>> > Can't afford the 50p eh, Wayne?
>>
>> I can, but why would I throw 50p away? It makes no sense.
>
> You haven't explained why you'd expect me do die if I had the knife.
> You don't get off so easily, boy.

Because you're ignorant, inept and unable to tell who's safe from who's
dangerous.

>> >> > Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy,
>> >> > a
>> >> > HUGE
>> >> > advantage.
>>
>> >> Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
>> >> consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which
>> >> is
>> >> most of the time.
>>
>> > I just did, moron...Steve Gartin. He's skilled. Or the guy I trained
>> > knife defenses with.
>>
>> Go look up the definition of 'criteria'; I asked for that, not for
>> instances.
>
> Rather than provide criteria, I've provided an example...someone who
> embodies the criteria.

Nah, forget about all that; provide the criteria.

> So now we have the semantics out of the way,
> tell us all how you're going to disarm Steve Gartin or Herb Cannon and
> then kill them.

Drink induced strawman.

>> >> > Very few are good enough to survive, let alone kill such an
>> >> > exponent.
>>
>> >> What the fuck is it that is eating out your brain? Your own statement
>> >> acknowledges that there do exist such people.
>>
>> > Go back and read it all again, Wayne. Your daily quota of ten pints of
>> > warm lager has rotted your tiny brain.
>>
>> You eat a lot of fruit, don't you? I suspect that you don't digest fruit
>> very well, which is causing it to ferment in your gut and making you act
>> drunk.
>
> How are you going to do it,Wayne?
>
>> >> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>>
>> >> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>>
>> > Well look at the whingeing troll.
>>
>> What, splashed out on a new mirror? Nice.
>
> How are you going to do it,Wayne?
>>
>> >> > Waynie thinks that grapplers think they are invincible, yet when
>> >> > they
>> >> > concede to the obvious, they are incompetent.
>>
>> >> Your idea of obvious is anything that your cult has programmed into
>> >> your
>> >> brain.
>>
>> > What cult is that, delusion-boi?
>>
>> They programmed in amnesia, too?
>
> How are you going to do it,Wayne?
>
>> >> > This is what years of learning karoddy in the church hall have done
>> >> > to
>> >> > him...given him a false sense of his own superiority.
>>
>> >> I don't see what is false about what I've actually done.
>>
>> > What is it that you've actually done? Teach a bunch of soccer moms how
>> > to yell ...Kaaiiii!!
>>
>> I think that you and Burkhead should team up. You could help him with
>> storylines for his comic.
>
> How are you going to do it,Wayne?
>
>> >>That's all I speak
>> >> about. You speak about what you wish were true.
>>
>> > You've got nothin' Wayne, nothin' at all.
>>
>> Just the reality I live in.
>
> How are you going to do it,Wayne?

There we have it: drunk as a skunk.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 05:06:11
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 9:48 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4f2535df-2853-4413-922b-e803be2909f4@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> >> >> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has a
> >> >> > knife,
> >> >> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>
> >> >> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and they
> >> >> were
> >> >> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You are
> >> >> an
> >> >> idiot.
>
> >> > Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across the
> >> > Atlantic) and get a gun"
>
> >> I'm saying I wouldn't go after such a person with a knife.
>
> > It's not a situation where you get to make that call.
>
> It's a situation I wouldn't put myself in.

How do you select your assailants?

> You, however, think anyone with
> a knife, whom you've arbritrarely labelled 'skilled,' is invincible against
> anyone unarmed. You'd likely put yourself in the position, and die.

It's about odds. If you can, try and think about that.

> >> > Your delusions grow deeper....
> >> >> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>
> >> >> What's the odds of my being that stupid?
>
> >> > Odds on.
>
> >> I've already told you that I'd look for another way, you crackhead.
>
> > Now you're just lying. You said you could disarm Herb from his Bowie.
>
> I said no such thing. You need to learn to read.

You said he'd die engaging you while he had a knife. Your halitosis is
the culprit?

> > You said you can disarm skilled knife wieldling assailants.
>
> I said it depends on the level of skill.

>You've have stubbornly refused to
> even attempt to define 'skilled,'

Is the radon seeping up through the floor in your council flat?

I'm not playing your little word-game..we debate the meaning of
'skilled' until you pretend to forget what was said. No way, dumbfuck.
I've given you two solid examples of skilled knife fighters, Steve and
Herb. There's your definition, either use the examples provided or
admit you're full of shit.

as you don't have a clue what such a
> judgement would be based on, as you are a Gracie sock-puppet, without a mind
> of your own.

How are you gonna do it, Wayne?

> > Now it's 'another way'. That would be backpeddling...something you do
> > well.
>
> On the rare occasions when I am wrong, I alter my position and I don't have
> a problem with that. You, however, lie.

How are you gonna do it, Wayne?

> >> >> > What are the odds of Waynie getting sliced like a Thanksgiving
> >> >> > turkey?
>
> >> >> If you had the only knife, I'd expect you to die.
>
> >> > In your 'killing zone', eh? ROTFLMAO!!!
> >> >> I wouldn't even bet a
> >> >> packet of crips on you.
>
> >> > Can't afford the 50p eh, Wayne?
>
> >> I can, but why would I throw 50p away? It makes no sense.
>
> > You haven't explained why you'd expect me do die if I had the knife.
> > You don't get off so easily, boy.
>
> Because you're ignorant, inept and unable to tell who's safe from who's
> dangerous.

How are you gonna do it, Wayne?

> >> >> > Weapons provide a BIG advantage, and in the hands of a skilled guy,
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > HUGE
> >> >> > advantage.
>
> >> >> Asswipe, why don't you present your criteria for 'skilled'? You
> >> >> consistently evade, when you discover that you are full of shit, which
> >> >> is
> >> >> most of the time.
>
> >> > I just did, moron...Steve Gartin. He's skilled. Or the guy I trained
> >> > knife defenses with.
>
> >> Go look up the definition of 'criteria'; I asked for that, not for
> >> instances.
>
> > Rather than provide criteria, I've provided an example...someone who
> > embodies the criteria.
>
> Nah, forget about all that; provide the criteria.

No can do. Examples are real-life, definitions are just word-play. How
are you gonna do it, Wayne?

> > So now we have the semantics out of the way,
> > tell us all how you're going to disarm Steve Gartin or Herb Cannon and
> > then kill them.
>
> Drink induced strawman.

How are you gonna do it, Wayne?

And please...the whole alcohol thing is your projection, and I laugh
at it, long and loud.

GDS

"Let's roll!"


29 Nov 2007 13:33:57
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:8eb9e678-39ed-4948-ad33-99d70cc34486@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 9:48 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4f2535df-2853-4413-922b-e803be2909f4@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>> >> >> > So let's say Waynie is unarmed and is facing Steve Gartin who has
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > knife,
>> >> >> > bad intentions on both sides.....
>>
>> >> >> There are some people in this world, that if I had the knife and
>> >> >> they
>> >> >> were
>> >> >> empty-handed, I'd forget about the knife and go get me a gun. You
>> >> >> are
>> >> >> an
>> >> >> idiot.
>>
>> >> > Ah, so you'd say "Excuse me, I just have to run off (or fly across
>> >> > the
>> >> > Atlantic) and get a gun"
>>
>> >> I'm saying I wouldn't go after such a person with a knife.
>>
>> > It's not a situation where you get to make that call.
>>
>> It's a situation I wouldn't put myself in.
>
> How do you select your assailants?

You explain your own idiocy.

>> You, however, think anyone with
>> a knife, whom you've arbritrarely labelled 'skilled,' is invincible
>> against
>> anyone unarmed. You'd likely put yourself in the position, and die.
>
> It's about odds. If you can, try and think about that.

No, your position has always been one of certainty; it's only now that you
can't think of any other way to squirm out of facing the fact that you are
wrong, that you've resorted to changing horses.

>> >> > Your delusions grow deeper....
>> >> >> > What are the odds of Gartin getting killed by Waynie?
>>
>> >> >> What's the odds of my being that stupid?
>>
>> >> > Odds on.
>>
>> >> I've already told you that I'd look for another way, you crackhead.
>>
>> > Now you're just lying. You said you could disarm Herb from his Bowie.
>>
>> I said no such thing. You need to learn to read.
>
> You said he'd die engaging you while he had a knife.

I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him. Learn to read, retard.

> Your halitosis is the culprit?

I don't know. Does bad breath make you stupid? I do like oninons. Surely
you're not that sensitive?

>> > You said you can disarm skilled knife wieldling assailants.
>>
>> I said it depends on the level of skill.
>
>>You've have stubbornly refused to
>> even attempt to define 'skilled,'
>
> Is the radon seeping up through the floor in your council flat?
>
> I'm not playing your little word-game..we debate the meaning of
> 'skilled' until you pretend to forget what was said. No way, dumbfuck.
> I've given you two solid examples of skilled knife fighters, Steve and
> Herb. There's your definition, either use the examples provided or
> admit you're full of shit.

It's quite clear that you are struggling to articulate your position. Let
me help you: you don't know what "a skilled knife wielder" means.

<Repetitive drunken chant snipped >

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 07:37:40
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

You are babbling again.




29 Nov 2007 05:48:28
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:

> I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him.

And how will you disarm him?

Crush him with one of your karoddy chops from within your 'killing
zone', lick him with your Down Syndrome afflicted cow-tongue, or
paralyze him with your smegma-breath?

What will happen is that you will get cut, maimed and quite possibly
killed.

This is what drinking too much warm lager has done to you...softened
your already slow-witted brain to a jelly-like consistency, and you
stumble in here with your pathetic, half-arsed arguments and martial
arts delusions.

Wayne Dobson...idiot.

GDS

"Let's roll!"

"Let's roll!"


29 Nov 2007 05:49:29
Mike
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 8:37 am, "Herbert Cannon" <hcanno...@cox.net > wrote:
> You are babbling again.

Did we just see dobbie yap on about his *killing zone* and how he
could take out a knife guy, but then say he wouldn't let himself be in
that position?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

Not only is Dobbie babbling, he is drooling. I hope he doesn't start
*trembling*.

-Mike K.

P.S. Dobbie Speak!


29 Nov 2007 05:58:18
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 10:49 pm, Mike <mkornecki2...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Nov 29, 8:37 am, "Herbert Cannon" <hcanno...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > You are babbling again.
>
> Did we just see dobbie yap on about his *killing zone* and how he
> could take out a knife guy, but then say he wouldn't let himself be in
> that position?

Yes, he did. He must be using that amazing faculty that allows him to
tell if someone does Bjj or if they're a skilled knife guy, just by
looking at them.

> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

May I join you, Mike?

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

> Not only is Dobbie babbling, he is drooling. I hope he doesn't start
> *trembling*.

After that comes the whimpering...

GDS

"Let's roll!"


29 Nov 2007 14:02:07
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:910365f7-062d-4079-99cc-ce2a2a460476@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>
>> I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him.
>
> And how will you disarm him?

Have you learned to read, yet? It's sad that I have to explain simple
sentences to you.

> Crush him with one of your karoddy chops from within your 'killing
> zone', lick him with your Down Syndrome afflicted cow-tongue, or
> paralyze him with your smegma-breath?
>
> What will happen is that you will get cut, maimed and quite possibly
> killed.

Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at odds
with the rest of your position.

*Tumble-weed rolls by*

> This is what drinking too much warm lager has done to you...softened
> your already slow-witted brain to a jelly-like consistency, and you
> stumble in here with your pathetic, half-arsed arguments and martial
> arts delusions.

A position based on fantasy, used to bolster the accusation that I am
delusional. Nice.

> Wayne Dobson...idiot.

GDS: drunk.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 06:14:43
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 11:02 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:910365f7-062d-4079-99cc-ce2a2a460476@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>
> >> I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him.
>
> > And how will you disarm him?
>
> Have you learned to read, yet? It's sad that I have to explain simple
> sentences to you.

Still waiting....

> > Crush him with one of your karoddy chops from within your 'killing
> > zone', lick him with your Down Syndrome afflicted cow-tongue, or
> > paralyze him with your smegma-breath?
>
> > What will happen is that you will get cut, maimed and quite possibly
> > killed.
>
> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at odds
> with the rest of your position.

Not at all. Look up Bakbakan. Spend some time with Christopher
Ricketts and you'll have your answer. This why you're such a fucking
idiot. You think all I know is Bjj. WRONG. That's only since 2000.

> *Tumble-weed rolls by*

OK, so now the tubleweed has rolled by, what have you to say now, you
stupid cunt?

> > This is what drinking too much warm lager has done to you...softened
> > your already slow-witted brain to a jelly-like consistency, and you
> > stumble in here with your pathetic, half-arsed arguments and martial
> > arts delusions.
>
> A position based on fantasy, used to bolster the accusation that I am
> delusional. Nice.

Nah, decades of reality, boy. I have forgotten more than you'll ever
know.


> GDS: drunk.

Haven't been drunk since I was 18.

When was the last time you were sober?

GDS

"Let's roll!"



29 Nov 2007 06:23:20
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 28, 7:41 pm, Sam the Bam <samtheb...@lycos.com > wrote:
> On Nov 28, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
> > > train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
> > > they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
> > > solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.
>
> > Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.
>
> What is that?

The "high-percentage" category.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


29 Nov 2007 15:01:31
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:d6f9534f-8abb-4637-9d26-7447126817d5@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 11:02 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:910365f7-062d-4079-99cc-ce2a2a460476@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him.
>>
>> > And how will you disarm him?
>>
>> Have you learned to read, yet? It's sad that I have to explain simple
>> sentences to you.
>
> Still waiting....
>
>> > Crush him with one of your karoddy chops from within your 'killing
>> > zone', lick him with your Down Syndrome afflicted cow-tongue, or
>> > paralyze him with your smegma-breath?
>>
>> > What will happen is that you will get cut, maimed and quite possibly
>> > killed.
>>
>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at
>> odds
>> with the rest of your position.
>
> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.

You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?

> Spend some time with Christopher
> Ricketts and you'll have your answer.

He spars all-out with live blades?

> This why you're such a fucking
> idiot. You think all I know is Bjj. WRONG. That's only since 2000.

No, I think you don't even know BJJ. You train with Christopher Ricketts?

>> *Tumble-weed rolls by*
>
> OK, so now the tubleweed has rolled by, what have you to say now, you
> stupid cunt?

Answer the questions.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




29 Nov 2007 09:28:35
Herbert Cannon
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


>
> After that comes the whimpering...

No you are wrong. The whining comes before the whimpering.




29 Nov 2007 09:40:56
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 28, 6:30 am, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Nov 27, 7:04 pm, Pierre Honeyman <pear...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Weapon disarms are like unicorns - everybody can describe what they
> > > look like, but it's a bitch to find anyone who's actually seen one.
>
> > The thing is everyone says that you can't depend on them yet we all
> > train them, and, if we fight, we notice that there do come times when
> > they're there. Even if it's something as simple as recognizing that a
> > solid hit to the back of the hand will open up the grip a little.
>
> Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.

I was thinking fist, but yes, I absolutely prefer the kamagong based
disarm.

> And sure, I teach disarms and train 'em, but only about 5 per cent of
> the total number I've ever been taught, and even then I don't have a
> lot of faith in that 5 per cent. Basically I include them as a
> "you've got someone in a restricted position, and you want to strip
> the weapon away while they figure out just how to get their elbow out
> of their own ear" situation.

Yep.

> The vast majority of disarms are happy-go-lucky nerf-world horse shit,
> suitable for demo'ing on a compliant partner.

Well the "compliant partner" training is valuable to learn the
mechanics, I think.

I don't think that disarms belong in the bread-n-butter training, and
if I was teaching someone who had to learn quickly I wouldn't bother
with them at all, but they certainly have value. I think that a
strong objective argument could be made that *most* of what we train
could be considered "nerf-world horse shit", frankly.

Pierre


29 Nov 2007 14:31:15
Sam the Bam
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > > Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.
>
> > What is that?
>
> The "high-percentage" category.

What is a kamagong-based disarm?


Sam


29 Nov 2007 15:45:05
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 2:31 pm, Sam the Bam <samtheb...@lycos.com > wrote:
> On Nov 29, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.
>
> > > What is that?
>
> > The "high-percentage" category.
>
> What is a kamagong-based disarm?

Hand meet stick, stick, meet hand.

Pierre


30 Nov 2007 00:27:53
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote in message
news:fvA3j.11666$EU1.1141@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantStar@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d6f9534f-8abb-4637-9d26-7447126817d5@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Nov 29, 11:02 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>> "GreenDistantStar" <GreenDistantS...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:910365f7-062d-4079-99cc-ce2a2a460476@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> > On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> I said he'd die if I took the knife away from him.
>>>
>>> > And how will you disarm him?
>>>
>>> Have you learned to read, yet? It's sad that I have to explain simple
>>> sentences to you.
>>
>> Still waiting....
>>
>>> > Crush him with one of your karoddy chops from within your 'killing
>>> > zone', lick him with your Down Syndrome afflicted cow-tongue, or
>>> > paralyze him with your smegma-breath?
>>>
>>> > What will happen is that you will get cut, maimed and quite possibly
>>> > killed.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
>>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at odds
>>> with the rest of your position.
>>
>> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.
>
> You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?

You don't know, do you?

>> Spend some time with Christopher
>> Ricketts and you'll have your answer.
>
> He spars all-out with live blades?

Do the research.

>> This why you're such a fucking
>> idiot. You think all I know is Bjj. WRONG. That's only since 2000.
>
> No, I think you don't even know BJJ.

No one cares what you think.

>You train with Christopher Ricketts?

Did.

>>> *Tumble-weed rolls by*
>>
>> OK, so now the tubleweed has rolled by, what have you to say now, you
>> stupid cunt?
>
> Answer the questions.

Learn to read, son.
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"





29 Nov 2007 17:02:57
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 2:38 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message

> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>
> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.

No Wayne, his position, and mine, is based on having read your posts
here for a couple of years now. The fact is that you have yet to post
anything that shows you know what you're talking about. Chas may
mention the fantastical, or the seemingly fantastical, but he's also
demonstrated a very solid understanding of what martial arts are and
how they are really used. So when *he* mention something that seems
unbelievable I generally pay some fucking attention because I have a
damn good feeling he's not just blowing wind up my skirt. However,
you, Wayne, haven't posted a fucking thing of substance in all the
time you've been here.

You've never demonstrated even the most rudimentary knowledge of the
fighting arts, yet you consistently claim God-like prowess. Given the
nature of the Universe, in this situation it is safest to assume that
you're merely delusional. You've yet to give us the faintest reason
to trust you when you tell us that the sky is blue, let alone any
reasons for us to trust you when you try to tell us how skilled you
are in the art of fighting. In fact the single explicit example I can
recall of you doing any kind of knife training *at all* comes from,
reportedly, when you were 10 or so. Other than probably-fantasy
stories, we've got nothing.

You don't describe techniques you know, or training you've had, or
teachers you've known, or styles you've done, nor, lacking all of
that, have you ever been able to provide technical descriptions of
your magical abilities.

Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it. Your entire
presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
insecure.

Fighting you would be an embarrassment. It would be akin to fighting
someone who was retarded or crippled, maybe elderly, but at the very
least incapable. It would be even worse if you really did believe you
could fight.

Pierre


30 Nov 2007 01:34:53
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net > wrote in message
news:FUA3j.4934$6r6.1356@newsfe23.lga...
>
>>
>> After that comes the whimpering...
>
> No you are wrong. The whining comes before the whimpering.

You're right, Herb.

Would I be correct in assuming that the pleading comes between the whining and
the whimpering?

--
GDS

"Let's roll!"




29 Nov 2007 19:13:39
Rabid Weasel
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:35:30 +0900, Fraser Johnston wrote:

>
> "Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote in message
> news:pan.2007.11.28.10.16.52.832564@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:56:36 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>>>> > <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
>>>> >news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>>> >> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
>>>> >>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>>> >> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>>> >> way to be sure.
>>>>
>>>> > Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>>>
>>>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>>>
>>> Obscure?
>>
>> I know. It was top grossing movie of that year, which wasn't really that
>> long ago. It's not like it's a B-grade cult-classic or anything.
>
> It was over 20 years ago.

[checking...] 1986.

Feh. Like I said. Not that long ago. *BARELY* 21 years.


> My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.

Is she legal yet?

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



29 Nov 2007 19:50:51
Rabid Weasel
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:02:57 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:

> Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
> No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it. Your entire
> presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
> compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
> insecure.

This whole post deserves to be rated above "Insightful."

Way above.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk
--
FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



30 Nov 2007 08:18:14
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:dOI3j.18584$CN4.15485@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
>>>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at
>>>> odds
>>>> with the rest of your position.
>>>
>>> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.
>>
>> You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?
>
> You don't know, do you?

I do know. You're full of shit.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 09:29:06
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Pierre Honeyman" <pearhed@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:ea7545ec-58e4-4789-8a00-a995b9590bfc@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 2:38 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>
>> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>>
>> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>
> No Wayne, his position, and mine, is based on having read your posts
> here for a couple of years now.

What were you doing for the rest of years I've been here, drooling?

> The fact is that you have yet to post
> anything that shows you know what you're talking about.

Like when I said, years back, that I'd side-step a shoot. I was met with
almost uniform derision. It wasn't until recently that sensei Mpeg
confirmed that this was feasible that there was any acknowledgement that I
was correct.

> Chas may
> mention the fantastical, or the seemingly fantastical, but he's also
> demonstrated a very solid understanding of what martial arts are and
> how they are really used.

What you're really trying to say is, "he's one of us."

> So when *he* mention something that seems
> unbelievable I generally pay some fucking attention because I have a
> damn good feeling he's not just blowing wind up my skirt. However,
> you, Wayne, haven't posted a fucking thing of substance in all the
> time you've been here.

You, as part of the BJJ cult, view yourself as an arbitrary arbiter of what
is real from what isn't. Yon contradict yourself, back and forth, but it
makes no difference, as you have the power to declare two mutually exclusive
statements to both be true. You're not the only one who reads my posts;
hence, it's clear to all that I do know what I'm talking about. You can do
nothing else to defend former lies, than to tell subsequent ones. You have
nothing else.

> You've never demonstrated even the most rudimentary knowledge of the
> fighting arts, yet you consistently claim God-like prowess.

I know more about the underpinnings of your art than you do. I can fight
and you can't. You can barely handle a drunk. I find it mystifying for you
to regard my skills as god-like. I suppose I should regard that as an
insult. I consider you to be inept. Consider that to be a complement.

> Given the
> nature of the Universe, in this situation it is safest to assume that
> you're merely delusional. You've yet to give us the faintest reason
> to trust you when you tell us that the sky is blue, let alone any
> reasons for us to trust you when you try to tell us how skilled you
> are in the art of fighting.

Trust shouldn't be such a big factor in it, as you should know what is
feasible from what isn't and when a story holds together from when it falls
apart. But none of that makes any difference as you disregard evidence and
wouldn't know what to make of it, even if you did bother to look at it.

> In fact the single explicit example I can
> recall of you doing any kind of knife training *at all* comes from,
> reportedly, when you were 10 or so. Other than probably-fantasy
> stories, we've got nothing.

I didn't state that I did knife training at ten. It's all archived. You
are delusional.

> You don't describe techniques you know, or training you've had, or
> teachers you've known, or styles you've done, nor, lacking all of
> that, have you ever been able to provide technical descriptions of
> your magical abilities.

I've answered most of what I've been asked. You lot have grilled me, then
when it was my time to ask you questions, you went silent. That's how bags
of wind behave. It's a long-standing policy of yours to make vague
accusations, as you have not a single instance to refer to, which will stand
up. That, alone, is evidence that even you don't believe your own story.

> Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
> No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it.

I know; I was polite. You viewed that as a sign weakness, then got your ass
whipped.

> Your entire
> presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
> compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
> insecure.

Nope. I haven't told a single lie. Go try find one. You think to
discredit me by presenting a demonstration of what you're accusing me of.
You show contempt for yourself.

> Fighting you would be an embarrassment.

Have I upset you? Why do you want to fight me?

> It would be akin to fighting
> someone who was retarded or crippled, maybe elderly, but at the very
> least incapable. It would be even worse if you really did believe you
> could fight.

*Waves a bottle of whiskey at Pierre, ominously*

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 11:40:00
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote in message
news:aHP3j.42523$JA1.21688@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:dOI3j.18584$CN4.15485@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
>>>>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at odds
>>>>> with the rest of your position.
>>>>
>>>> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.
>>>
>>> You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?
>>
>> You don't know, do you?
>
> I do know. You're full of shit.

I'm in the Northern Hemisphere mid next year.

Do you want the opportunity to find out?

Fuck it, I'll even lower myself and visit your bleak rock to do it.

I'll make sure there's a vid there to capture it all, too.

RMA can make book on it.

I have 1,000 Pounds Sterling that says I make you my bitch.

--
GDS

"Let's roll!"





30 Nov 2007 12:24:15
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:kES3j.18806$CN4.4766@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com> wrote in message
> news:aHP3j.42523$JA1.21688@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:dOI3j.18584$CN4.15485@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>>>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at
>>>>>> odds
>>>>>> with the rest of your position.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.
>>>>
>>>> You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?
>>>
>>> You don't know, do you?
>>
>> I do know. You're full of shit.
>
> I'm in the Northern Hemisphere mid next year.
>
> Do you want the opportunity to find out?

Not really.

> Fuck it, I'll even lower myself and visit your bleak rock to do it.
>
> I'll make sure there's a vid there to capture it all, too.
>
> RMA can make book on it.
>
> I have 1,000 Pounds Sterling that says I make you my bitch.

Hahaha... Keep your money. Hahaha... You people are just so predictable.
I wonder how many times you're going to go round in the same old circle.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 13:11:36
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote in message
news:PhT3j.13804$EU1.201@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:kES3j.18806$CN4.4766@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com> wrote in message
>> news:aHP3j.42523$JA1.21688@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>> news:dOI3j.18584$CN4.15485@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>
>>>>>>> Speaking of which, I'd like to take you back to the question of how you
>>>>>>> manage to spar all-out, without getting yourself killed? It seems at
>>>>>>> odds
>>>>>>> with the rest of your position.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not at all. Look up Bakbakan.
>>>>>
>>>>> You spar all-out with live blades, in Bakbakan?
>>>>
>>>> You don't know, do you?
>>>
>>> I do know. You're full of shit.
>>
>> I'm in the Northern Hemisphere mid next year.
>>
>> Do you want the opportunity to find out?
>
> Not really.

Well keep guessing and getting it wrong.

>> Fuck it, I'll even lower myself and visit your bleak rock to do it.
>>
>> I'll make sure there's a vid there to capture it all, too.
>>
>> RMA can make book on it.
>>
>> I have 1,000 Pounds Sterling that says I make you my bitch.
>
> Hahaha... Keep your money. Hahaha...

That's exactly what I'd do...keep my money...and yours.

> You people are just so predictable.

'You people'?

Yeah, stay safe with the soccer moms, Wayne.
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"




30 Nov 2007 06:06:04
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 7:13 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote:

> > My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.
>
> Is she legal yet?

Kirk? Is it time I brush up on my "Widder Lawson? I was a friend of
the deceased." routine?

Badger "And seein' how you're all alone now" North
www.youngforest.ca


30 Nov 2007 06:09:15
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 5:31 pm, Sam the Bam <samtheb...@lycos.com > wrote:
> On Nov 29, Badger North <young_for...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well, I put kamagong-based disarms in a different category.
>
> > > What is that?
>
> > The "high-percentage" category.
>
> What is a kamagong-based disarm?

Kamagong is a species of iron-wood in the Philippines, often used to
make fighting sticks. The kamagong-based disarm starts with impact,
to either smash bone, or cause muscle to spasm/unclench.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


30 Nov 2007 06:10:29
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Nov 29, 8:34 pm, "Greendistantstar"
<pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au > wrote:

> Would I be correct in assuming that the pleading comes between the whining and
> the whimpering?

And this concludes another installment of "The Married Men of RMA"...

Badger "Yes Dear" North
www.youngforest.ca


30 Nov 2007 14:17:07
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote in message
news:pan.2007.11.30.00.50.47.849855@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:02:57 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:
>
>> Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
>> No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it. Your entire
>> presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
>> compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
>> insecure.
>
> This whole post deserves to be rated above "Insightful."
>
> Way above.

Yes, it was a great reply.

I see in Wayne's inept response, he refers to Pierre as one of the 'Bjj cult'.
Pierre now does Bjj?

And he again refers to 'you people'.

This is the utterance of the self-marginalized...Wayne Dobson vs The World.
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"






30 Nov 2007 14:32:20
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote in message
news:CJQ3j.42642$JA1.11681@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Pierre Honeyman" <pearhed@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ea7545ec-58e4-4789-8a00-a995b9590bfc@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>> On Nov 29, 2:38 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>
>>> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>>>
>>> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>>
>> No Wayne, his position, and mine, is based on having read your posts
>> here for a couple of years now.
>
> What were you doing for the rest of years I've been here, drooling?

Iirc for much of it he's been kicking your ass silly.

>> The fact is that you have yet to post
>> anything that shows you know what you're talking about.
>
> Like when I said, years back, that I'd side-step a shoot. I was met with
> almost uniform derision. It wasn't until recently that sensei Mpeg confirmed
> that this was feasible that there was any acknowledgement that I was correct.

Of course it's feasible...what's not feasible is *you* doing it against anyone
who knows what they're doing.

>> Chas may
>> mention the fantastical, or the seemingly fantastical, but he's also
>> demonstrated a very solid understanding of what martial arts are and
>> how they are really used.
>
> What you're really trying to say is, "he's one of us."

Damn straight.

>> So when *he* mention something that seems
>> unbelievable I generally pay some fucking attention because I have a
>> damn good feeling he's not just blowing wind up my skirt. However,
>> you, Wayne, haven't posted a fucking thing of substance in all the
>> time you've been here.
>
> You, as part of the BJJ cult,

Is he? Really???

>view yourself as an arbitrary arbiter of what is real from what isn't. Yon
>contradict yourself, back and forth, but it makes no difference, as you have the
>power to declare two mutually exclusive statements to both be true.

Gibberish.

>You're not the only one who reads my posts; hence, it's clear to all that I do
>know what I'm talking about.

Name one person here who has stated that.

>You can do nothing else to defend former lies, than to tell subsequent ones.
>You have nothing else.

What lies has Pierre told?

>> You've never demonstrated even the most rudimentary knowledge of the
>> fighting arts, yet you consistently claim God-like prowess.
>
> I know more about the underpinnings of your art than you do.

You don't even know what art Pierre does, you stupid, confused, drunken ass-wipe.

> I can fight and you can't.

Prove it.

> You can barely handle a drunk.

He's certainly handled you.

> I find it mystifying for you to regard my skills as god-like. I suppose I
> should regard that as an insult. I consider you to be inept. Consider that to
> be a complement.

You mean a 'compliment'. Or did you say that 'acidentley' , 'grasshoper' ?

>> Given the
>> nature of the Universe, in this situation it is safest to assume that
>> you're merely delusional. You've yet to give us the faintest reason
>> to trust you when you tell us that the sky is blue, let alone any
>> reasons for us to trust you when you try to tell us how skilled you
>> are in the art of fighting.
>
> Trust shouldn't be such a big factor in it, as you should know what is feasible
> from what isn't and when a story holds together from when it falls apart. But
> none of that makes any difference as you disregard evidence and wouldn't know
> what to make of it, even if you did bother to look at it.

More gibberish.

>> In fact the single explicit example I can
>> recall of you doing any kind of knife training *at all* comes from,
>> reportedly, when you were 10 or so. Other than probably-fantasy
>> stories, we've got nothing.
>
> I didn't state that I did knife training at ten. It's all archived. You are
> delusional.

I'll have a look...as that's my recollection, too.

>> You don't describe techniques you know, or training you've had, or
>> teachers you've known, or styles you've done, nor, lacking all of
>> that, have you ever been able to provide technical descriptions of
>> your magical abilities.
>
> I've answered most of what I've been asked.

Hogwash.

>You lot have grilled me, then when it was my time to ask you questions, you went
>silent.

'You lot'? That's a nice little persecution complex you've got going there,
Wayne.

>That's how bags of wind behave. It's a long-standing policy of yours to make
>vague accusations, as you have not a single instance to refer to, which will
>stand up. That, alone, is evidence that even you don't believe your own story.

Gibberish galore!

>> Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
>> No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it.
>
> I know; I was polite. You viewed that as a sign weakness, then got your ass
> whipped.

By whom? You? LOFL!!!

>> Your entire
>> presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
>> compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
>> insecure.
>
> Nope. I haven't told a single lie. Go try find one. You think to discredit
> me by presenting a demonstration of what you're accusing me of. You show
> contempt for yourself.
>
>> Fighting you would be an embarrassment.
>
> Have I upset you? Why do you want to fight me?
>
>> It would be akin to fighting
>> someone who was retarded or crippled, maybe elderly, but at the very
>> least incapable. It would be even worse if you really did believe you
>> could fight.
>
> *Waves a bottle of whiskey at Pierre, ominously*

*Wanders off....drunk as a Lord*
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"




30 Nov 2007 08:50:30
Neil Gendzwill
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

Wayne Dobson wrote:
> You're not the only one who reads my posts;
> hence, it's clear to all that I do know what I'm talking about.

It's not clear to me, nor to several people that have replied. So
there's an example of a lie right there, I didn't even have to look past
this post.

I agree with every single word Pierre wrote, and thought he showed
remarkable insight and restraint. I'll go back now to my standard
policy of not replying to any of your idiocy. It's just a waste of
perfectly good electrons.

Neil


30 Nov 2007 15:57:31
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:U9V3j.18835$CN4.13226@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com> wrote in message
> news:CJQ3j.42642$JA1.11681@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> "Pierre Honeyman" <pearhed@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ea7545ec-58e4-4789-8a00-a995b9590bfc@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Nov 29, 2:38 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>
>>>> > That Waynie thinks he is such a person is ludicrous.
>>>>
>>>> Your whole position is based purely on malice. You have nothing else.
>>>
>>> No Wayne, his position, and mine, is based on having read your posts
>>> here for a couple of years now.
>>
>> What were you doing for the rest of years I've been here, drooling?
>
> Iirc for much of it he's been kicking your ass silly.
>
>>> The fact is that you have yet to post
>>> anything that shows you know what you're talking about.
>>
>> Like when I said, years back, that I'd side-step a shoot. I was met with
>> almost uniform derision. It wasn't until recently that sensei Mpeg
>> confirmed that this was feasible that there was any acknowledgement that
>> I was correct.
>
> Of course it's feasible...

Once sensei Mpeg told you that it was feasible.

>...what's not feasible is *you* doing it against anyone who knows what
>they're doing.

Lie. You said it couldn't be done against a shoot; then someone went and
actually tried it, and came back reporting that it could be done against a
bad shoot; then, after sensei Mpeg spoke, you claimed you were only
disagreeing with me because I wasn't humble enough; now, you say that it is
feasible, but you were disagreeing because you didn't think that I could do
it.

Your story, as usual, is all over the place.

>>> Chas may
>>> mention the fantastical, or the seemingly fantastical, but he's also
>>> demonstrated a very solid understanding of what martial arts are and
>>> how they are really used.
>>
>> What you're really trying to say is, "he's one of us."
>
> Damn straight.

Then, why don't you simply say, "He's one of us"? Like I said, you're only
arguing with me out of malice.

>>> So when *he* mention something that seems
>>> unbelievable I generally pay some fucking attention because I have a
>>> damn good feeling he's not just blowing wind up my skirt. However,
>>> you, Wayne, haven't posted a fucking thing of substance in all the
>>> time you've been here.
>>
>> You, as part of the BJJ cult,
>
> Is he? Really???

Yes.

>>view yourself as an arbitrary arbiter of what is real from what isn't.
>>Yon contradict yourself, back and forth, but it makes no difference, as
>>you have the power to declare two mutually exclusive statements to both be
>>true.
>
> Gibberish.

Nope, all of it is true.

>>You're not the only one who reads my posts; hence, it's clear to all that
>>I do know what I'm talking about.
>
> Name one person here who has stated that.

Why?

>>You can do nothing else to defend former lies, than to tell subsequent
>>ones. You have nothing else.
>
> What lies has Pierre told?

*Proof of delusional state*

>>> You've never demonstrated even the most rudimentary knowledge of the
>>> fighting arts, yet you consistently claim God-like prowess.
>>
>> I know more about the underpinnings of your art than you do.
>
> You don't even know what art Pierre does, you stupid, confused, drunken
> ass-wipe.

Pierre does Kali, to my recollection.

>> I can fight and you can't.
>
> Prove it.
>
>> You can barely handle a drunk.
>
> He's certainly handled you.
>
>> I find it mystifying for you to regard my skills as god-like. I suppose
>> I should regard that as an insult. I consider you to be inept. Consider
>> that to be a complement.
>
> You mean a 'compliment'. Or did you say that 'acidentley' , 'grasshoper' ?

No, I didn't say it 'acidentley'.

>>> Given the
>>> nature of the Universe, in this situation it is safest to assume that
>>> you're merely delusional. You've yet to give us the faintest reason
>>> to trust you when you tell us that the sky is blue, let alone any
>>> reasons for us to trust you when you try to tell us how skilled you
>>> are in the art of fighting.
>>
>> Trust shouldn't be such a big factor in it, as you should know what is
>> feasible from what isn't and when a story holds together from when it
>> falls apart. But none of that makes any difference as you disregard
>> evidence and wouldn't know what to make of it, even if you did bother to
>> look at it.
>
> More gibberish.
>
>>> In fact the single explicit example I can
>>> recall of you doing any kind of knife training *at all* comes from,
>>> reportedly, when you were 10 or so. Other than probably-fantasy
>>> stories, we've got nothing.
>>
>> I didn't state that I did knife training at ten. It's all archived. You
>> are delusional.
>
> I'll have a look...as that's my recollection, too.

You both have a habit of recalling shit that simply never happened. You
won't find any such reference.

>>> You don't describe techniques you know, or training you've had, or
>>> teachers you've known, or styles you've done, nor, lacking all of
>>> that, have you ever been able to provide technical descriptions of
>>> your magical abilities.
>>
>> I've answered most of what I've been asked.
>
> Hogwash.

It's all archived, asshole. This stubborn dishonesty shit is not going to
wash in an environment where everything is recorded.

>>You lot have grilled me, then when it was my time to ask you questions,
>>you went silent.
>
> 'You lot'? That's a nice little persecution complex you've got going
> there, Wayne.

Oh dear, you're back on the meths.

>>That's how bags of wind behave. It's a long-standing policy of yours to
>>make vague accusations, as you have not a single instance to refer to,
>>which will stand up. That, alone, is evidence that even you don't believe
>>your own story.
>
> Gibberish galore!

The anti-freeze appears to have stunted your vocabulary.

>>> Malice? Unlikely. Intense dislike doesn't mean that it's malice.
>>> No, your treatment here is because you've *earned* it.
>>
>> I know; I was polite. You viewed that as a sign weakness, then got your
>> ass whipped.
>
> By whom? You? LOFL!!!

Don't you think that laughing gas, on top of everything else is a little too
much?

>>> Your entire
>>> presentation here has been one of a fraud, a liar, a charlatan, or,
>>> compassionately, someone who is either deluded or merely devastatingly
>>> insecure.
>>
>> Nope. I haven't told a single lie. Go try find one. You think to
>> discredit me by presenting a demonstration of what you're accusing me of.
>> You show contempt for yourself.
>>
>>> Fighting you would be an embarrassment.
>>
>> Have I upset you? Why do you want to fight me?
>>
>>> It would be akin to fighting
>>> someone who was retarded or crippled, maybe elderly, but at the very
>>> least incapable. It would be even worse if you really did believe you
>>> could fight.
>>
>> *Waves a bottle of whiskey at Pierre, ominously*
>
> *Wanders off....drunk as a Lord*

You'd better hope that I'm not drunk, as I make more sense than you, when
you're supposedly sober.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 15:57:44
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Neil Gendzwill" <ngendzwill@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:13l08pnoeud9rb4@corp.supernews.com...
> Wayne Dobson wrote:
>> You're not the only one who reads my posts; hence, it's clear to all that
>> I do know what I'm talking about.
>
> It's not clear to me, nor to several people that have replied. So there's
> an example of a lie right there, I didn't even have to look past this
> post.

You have it all wrong; I don't give any credence to the word of a dishonest
person or gangs of cronies. You will say what you need to, to save face.
It's more enlightening to observe your actions.

> I agree with every single word Pierre wrote, and thought he showed
> remarkable insight and restraint.

I don't know what the point is of you writing that is, as I don't know who
believes you.

> I'll go back now to my standard policy of not replying to any of your
> idiocy. It's just a waste of perfectly good electrons.

Good policy.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 11:28:05
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net > wrote
>> 'Surprise' is a great leveler in terms of 'skill'.
> Which works both ways and is a large part of skill. For instance, the
> mere drawing of a sword should be done so that the enemy does not know
> which cut will be used by you. Surprise!

It's particularly cogent when fighting an opponent that outmatches you in
some way; size, strength, technique, weapon and so on.
If the knifer knows you're going to defend, as in a dojo scenario, it's easy
for him to beat the disarm he knows is coming- and generally knows which
disarm it's going to be also.
If he doesn't know, as in the real world where you don't get scouts/video,
you may be able to beat his attack/stance on a pretty high percentage level.
The decryers' can continue to postulate increasingly difficult scenarios
until the extreme doesn't make any sense, but most disarms work if you can
time/distance them on an unprepared knifer.

>>> Therefore, the only person that you will be able to take a weapon away
>>> from is some moron that is not skilled in its use.
>> Many of whom are just the guys attacking you.
> No argument there.

Which refutes the 'gangs of roaming Gracies attacking unsuspecting
tourists', or 'attacks from silat/kali knifers on average joes'.
The reality is that your average attacker *isn't* 'Gartin'- but don't think
they're not dangerous, the prisons are filled with them- and hospitals with
their victims.
It's silly to ignore attackers with weapons- and sillier to assume that
you're responding 'unarmed'. Even at worst, I've got on good kicking
shoes/boots, a heavy belt/buckle, some little folding knife,....

>> You were already going to get stabbed, why not take a chance?
> Unless you have a choice?

What choice?
The options seem very limited to me.
We assume that one cannot run, or it's useless to discuss self-defense
applications in the first place.
We probably ought to assume that we don't have our pistol with us either-
'shoot them' is a good answer to a number of questions.
We can assume that any opponent has an available weapon- it's 500,000 years
too late to assume that they're not available to most criminals.

--
Chas
http://www.jacksandsaps.com/




30 Nov 2007 21:56:35
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:Pfydncsp2ZGyy83anZ2dnUVZ_ryqnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Herbert Cannon" <hcannon18@cox.net> wrote
>>> 'Surprise' is a great leveler in terms of 'skill'.
>> Which works both ways and is a large part of skill. For instance, the
>> mere drawing of a sword should be done so that the enemy does not know
>> which cut will be used by you. Surprise!
>
> It's particularly cogent when fighting an opponent that outmatches you in
> some way; size, strength, technique, weapon and so on.
> If the knifer knows you're going to defend, as in a dojo scenario, it's
> easy for him to beat the disarm he knows is coming- and generally knows
> which disarm it's going to be also.

Exactly. How the hell you're supposed to disarm someone if they can sense
it coming, I don't know; maybe if you ask them nicely: "Good Mr Crackhead,
I'm just about to reach over and take that knife from you. Please don't
move a muscle." Hmmm... Perhaps not.

> If he doesn't know, as in the real world where you don't get scouts/video,
> you may be able to beat his attack/stance on a pretty high percentage
> level.
> The decryers' can continue to postulate increasingly difficult scenarios
> until the extreme doesn't make any sense, but most disarms work if you can
> time/distance them on an unprepared knifer.

Duh! Put a knife in the hand of someone untrained, who hasn't read the
script and tell them to attack you; it's usually trivial to disarm them, the
first time. Most people wise up real quick, after the first go. It's doing
it a second and subsequent times, that takes skill.

>>>> Therefore, the only person that you will be able to take a weapon away
>>>> from is some moron that is not skilled in its use.
>>> Many of whom are just the guys attacking you.
>> No argument there.
>
> Which refutes the 'gangs of roaming Gracies attacking unsuspecting
> tourists', or 'attacks from silat/kali knifers on average joes'.
> The reality is that your average attacker *isn't* 'Gartin'...

*Makes note*

> - but don't think they're not dangerous, the prisons are filled with them-
> and hospitals with their victims.
> It's silly to ignore attackers with weapons- and sillier to assume that
> you're responding 'unarmed'. Even at worst, I've got on good kicking
> shoes/boots, a heavy belt/buckle, some little folding knife,....
>
>>> You were already going to get stabbed, why not take a chance?
>> Unless you have a choice?
>
> What choice?
> The options seem very limited to me.
> We assume that one cannot run, or it's useless to discuss self-defense
> applications in the first place.

Yes, it's necessary to explain that one doesn't choose to stand unarmed in
front of a knife weilding assailant, to find out if you can take the knife
from the miscreant before he carves you up; not a choice that most sane
people make. These complicated concepts have to be explained to those who
have spent a little too long in the dojo.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




30 Nov 2007 15:42:17
Chas
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote
> Duh! Put a knife in the hand of someone untrained, who hasn't read the
> script and tell them to attack you; it's usually trivial to disarm them,
> the first time. Most people wise up real quick, after the first go. It's
> doing it a second and subsequent times, that takes skill.

Most tricks work once.
Hopefully, you don't have to show them twice to the same attacker.
Most knifers, in my experience, are tentative unless they've already
attacked you immediately. If they fuck around, they are not sure about
cutting you and won't react immediately to your charge- you have a little
window of time that they're brain-locked.
Same with pistoleers- if they are just threatening you with it, they need
time to adjust to a change of circumstance and deciding to shoot. They're
vulnerable during that time. If they just came to shoot you, they just shoot
you- there's no time for you to do anything.
There's no way to 'test' that includes the necessary 'surprise' element- you
just practice assiduously and hope that it manifests in hazardous
circumstances.
In fact, my own standard for martial prowess is how it manifests in surprise
situations- how internalized it is; instinctive.

Chas




01 Dec 2007 00:25:12
nemo_outis
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Chas" <chasclements@comcast.net > wrote in
news:P6ednT65LtteDM3anZ2dnUVZ_rGrnZ2d@comcast.com:

> "Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com> wrote
>> Duh! Put a knife in the hand of someone untrained, who hasn't read
>> the script and tell them to attack you; it's usually trivial to
>> disarm them, the first time. Most people wise up real quick, after
>> the first go. It's doing it a second and subsequent times, that
>> takes skill.
>
> Most tricks work once.
> Hopefully, you don't have to show them twice to the same attacker.
> Most knifers, in my experience, are tentative unless they've already
> attacked you immediately. If they fuck around, they are not sure about
> cutting you and won't react immediately to your charge- you have a
> little window of time that they're brain-locked.
> Same with pistoleers- if they are just threatening you with it, they
> need time to adjust to a change of circumstance and deciding to shoot.
> They're vulnerable during that time. If they just came to shoot you,
> they just shoot you- there's no time for you to do anything.
> There's no way to 'test' that includes the necessary 'surprise'
> element- you just practice assiduously and hope that it manifests in
> hazardous circumstances.
> In fact, my own standard for martial prowess is how it manifests in
> surprise situations- how internalized it is; instinctive.
>
> Chas

Excellent points, excellent post!

Regards,


30 Nov 2007 20:02:23
Rabid Weasel
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:06:04 -0800, Badger North wrote:

> On Nov 29, 7:13 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>
>> > My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.
>>
>> Is she legal yet?
>
> Kirk? Is it time I brush up on my "Widder Lawson? I was a friend of
> the deceased." routine?
>
> Badger "And seein' how you're all alone now" North
> www.youngforest.ca

And best yet, she comes with all her *own* guns, knows how to shoot, and
is willing to let her new Bea have all my swords and knives and guns and
stuff.

Peace favor your sword (IH),
Kirk

FREE historic Western Martial Arts manuals:
http://www.lulu.com/lawson

Western Martial Arts - http://cbd.atspace.com/

"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts



01 Dec 2007 06:23:24
Greendistantstar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com > wrote in message
news:YpW3j.14904$EU1.7118@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Neil Gendzwill" <ngendzwill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:13l08pnoeud9rb4@corp.supernews.com...
>> Wayne Dobson wrote:
>>> You're not the only one who reads my posts; hence, it's clear to all that I
>>> do know what I'm talking about.
>>
>> It's not clear to me, nor to several people that have replied. So there's an
>> example of a lie right there, I didn't even have to look past this post.
>
> You have it all wrong;

Of course....Neil has it wrong, so does Pierre, Dan, Kirk, Fraser and aw, for
fuck's sake.... everyone here except you, eh?

And what ma is it that you do again? Who have you trained with? Have you any rank
or grading whatsoever? Have you ever represented a club, or a county, state or
national body?

Just answer the questions....they're very simple...even for one as dim-witted as
you.
--
GDS

"Let's roll!"






01 Dec 2007 11:17:20
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovethis@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:w574j.19102$CN4.11743@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Wayne Dobson" <nospam@noaddress.com> wrote in message
> news:YpW3j.14904$EU1.7118@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> "Neil Gendzwill" <ngendzwill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:13l08pnoeud9rb4@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Wayne Dobson wrote:
>>>> You're not the only one who reads my posts; hence, it's clear to all
>>>> that I do know what I'm talking about.
>>>
>>> It's not clear to me, nor to several people that have replied. So
>>> there's an example of a lie right there, I didn't even have to look past
>>> this post.
>>
>> You have it all wrong;
>
> Of course....Neil has it wrong, so does Pierre, Dan, Kirk, Fraser...

Yep. That part is correct.

>... and aw, for fuck's sake.... everyone here except you, eh?

Nah, that part's wrong.

> And what ma is it that you do again?

Try to have someone teach you how to use Google.

> Who have you trained with?

Unimportant. I'll leave you to the name-dropping.

> Have you any rank or grading whatsoever?

Belt for stop trousers fall down.

> Have you ever represented a club, or a county, state or national body?

None of that. I deal with the real world.

> Just answer the questions....they're very simple...

Correct.

>...even for one as dim-witted as you.

Maybe if you keep saying it, someone will be able to see it.

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




01 Dec 2007 03:33:39
GreenDistantStar
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Dec 1, 8:17 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:

<null sets noted >

> None of that. I deal with the real world.

The 'real world' of your 'killing zone'. Right. Gotcha.

> > Just answer the questions....they're very simple...
>
> Correct.
>
> >...even for one as dim-witted as you.
>
> Maybe if you keep saying it, someone will be able to see it.

That you have nothing is plain for all to see.

GDS

"Let's roll!"


01 Dec 2007 14:34:48
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Dec 1, 3:17 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:w574j.19102$CN4.11743@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > And what ma is it that you do again?
>
> Try to have someone teach you how to use Google.

http://www.waynedobson.co.uk/

Pierre


02 Dec 2007 02:07:53
Wayne Dobson
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Pierre Honeyman" <pearhed@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:9107b0e2-5e73-47d7-877b-50f1f159a1ae@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 1, 3:17 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>
>> news:w574j.19102$CN4.11743@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> > And what ma is it that you do again?
>>
>> Try to have someone teach you how to use Google.
>
> http://www.waynedobson.co.uk/

Rugby coach, teaching little girls; now, magician in a wheelchair; maybe,
teaches rugby from a wheelchair, whilst performing magic tricks and
practising karoddy chops. Haha...

--
Wayne Dobson
AKA "Dobbie The House Elf"




02 Dec 2007 20:35:52
Pierre Honeyman
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Dec 1, 6:07 pm, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com > wrote:
> "Pierre Honeyman" <pear...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9107b0e2-5e73-47d7-877b-50f1f159a1ae@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:17 am, "Wayne Dobson" <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
> >> "Greendistantstar" <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>
> >>news:w574j.19102$CN4.11743@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> > And what ma is it that you do again?
>
> >> Try to have someone teach you how to use Google.
>
> >http://www.waynedobson.co.uk/
>
> Rugby coach, teaching little girls; now, magician in a wheelchair; maybe,
> teaches rugby from a wheelchair, whilst performing magic tricks and
> practising karoddy chops. Haha...

It would explain a lot.

Pierre


04 Dec 2007 12:26:14
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Badger North" <young_forest@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:918bc30c-d6e2-4fe9-8791-b7bf02889f69@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 29, 8:34 pm, "Greendistantstar"
> <pde63539Oremovet...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>> Would I be correct in assuming that the pleading comes between the whining
>> and
>> the whimpering?
>
> And this concludes another installment of "The Married Men of RMA"...

Gee it's nice to be out of that group.

Fraser





04 Dec 2007 12:27:44
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote in message
news:pan.2007.11.30.00.13.37.300789@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:35:30 +0900, Fraser Johnston wrote:
>
>>
>> "Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2007.11.28.10.16.52.832564@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:56:36 -0800, Pierre Honeyman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 27, 9:48 am, Pboud <pboud_01NOSPA...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> David L. Burkhead wrote:
>>>>> > <h...@nospam.org> wrote in message
>>>>> >news:474c55b3.962922906@news.newsguy.com...
>>>>> >> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:19:55 -0700, "Chas" <chascleme...@comcast.net>
>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> projectile weapons are irrelevant to this discussion- you have> to
>>>>> >>> be close to 'dis-arm'.
>>>>> >> I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only
>>>>> >> way to be sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> > Hal has made the correct glow in the dark.
>>>>>
>>>>> Props for the obscure sci-fi references as well.
>>>>
>>>> Obscure?
>>>
>>> I know. It was top grossing movie of that year, which wasn't really that
>>> long ago. It's not like it's a B-grade cult-classic or anything.
>>
>> It was over 20 years ago.
>
> [checking...] 1986.
>
> Feh. Like I said. Not that long ago. *BARELY* 21 years.
>
>
>> My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.
>
> Is she legal yet?

She is but you're married.

Fraser





04 Dec 2007 12:29:30
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne > wrote in message
news:pan.2007.12.01.01.02.21.847320@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:06:04 -0800, Badger North wrote:
>
>> On Nov 29, 7:13 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>>
>>> > My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.
>>>
>>> Is she legal yet?
>>
>> Kirk? Is it time I brush up on my "Widder Lawson? I was a friend of
>> the deceased." routine?
>>
>> Badger "And seein' how you're all alone now" North
>> www.youngforest.ca
>
> And best yet, she comes with all her *own* guns, knows how to shoot, and
> is willing to let her new Bea have all my swords and knives and guns and
> stuff.

Took my girlfriend to the gun club the other day and we were getting ready to
go out and shoot and I was loading magazines. She said "Let me give you a hand
with that" and started loading as well. The other guys at the club gave me the
you fucking lucky bastard look. It was great.

Fraser






04 Dec 2007 14:07:09
Gernot Hassenpflug
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

"Fraser Johnston" <ftrust@iinet.net.au > writes:

> "Rabid Weasel" <lawson@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote in message
> news:pan.2007.12.01.01.02.21.847320@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne...
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:06:04 -0800, Badger North wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 29, 7:13 pm, Rabid Weasel <law...@NO27615SPAM+dayton.ne> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > My housemate wasn't even born when it came out.
>>>>
>>>> Is she legal yet?
>>>
>>> Kirk? Is it time I brush up on my "Widder Lawson? I was a friend of
>>> the deceased." routine?
>>>
>>> Badger "And seein' how you're all alone now" North
>>> www.youngforest.ca
>>
>> And best yet, she comes with all her *own* guns, knows how to shoot, and
>> is willing to let her new Bea have all my swords and knives and guns and
>> stuff.
>
> Took my girlfriend to the gun club the other day and we were getting ready to
> go out and shoot and I was loading magazines. She said "Let me give you a hand
> with that" and started loading as well. The other guys at the club gave me the
> you fucking lucky bastard look. It was great.

Guys...are so dumb :-)
--
BOFH excuse #193:

Did you pay the new Support Fee?


04 Dec 2007 06:47:45
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Dec 3, 10:26 pm, "Fraser Johnston" <ftr...@iinet.net.au > wrote:

> > And this concludes another installment of "The Married Men of RMA"...
>
> Gee it's nice to be out of that group.

Just watch yourself, mate. Any moment now, my wife will tell me to
write you a blistering reply, and then you're in trouble.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca


05 Dec 2007 16:23:14
Fraser Johnston
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms


"Badger North" <young_forest@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:fde51201-995e-428f-9355-7852778461eb@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 3, 10:26 pm, "Fraser Johnston" <ftr...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>> > And this concludes another installment of "The Married Men of RMA"...
>>
>> Gee it's nice to be out of that group.
>
> Just watch yourself, mate. Any moment now, my wife will tell me to
> write you a blistering reply, and then you're in trouble.

Just don't tell my girlfriend. ; )

Fraser





05 Dec 2007 06:09:37
Badger North
Re: WOTT - Weapons disarms

On Dec 5, 2:23 am, "Fraser Johnston" <ftr...@iinet.net.au > wrote:

> > Just watch yourself, mate. Any moment now, my wife will tell me to
> > write you a blistering reply, and then you're in trouble.
>
> Just don't tell my girlfriend. ; )

She already knows - all women have a brain implant that connects them
to Femnet. I've said too much already.

Badger North
www.youngforest.ca