PDA

View Full Version : Jujitsu in a street fight



Pages : [1] 2 3

TxSanshou
10/14/2009 4:55pm,
Ok this is a video I found on youtube did not see anything in the search results about it. These skateboarders who were filming that day get in an argument with a gang member. I'm not sure what triggered the argument and you cant really tell from the video, but the gang member pulls a gun on the skater then threatens his brother but luckily the kid and his brother had backgrounds in brazillian jujitsu and judo. Share your thoughts.

YouTube - Gangster vs skater (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uk0woFFGOA)

IMightBeWrong
10/14/2009 5:03pm,
Its been posted before. In fact, I think we have this in our Video Archives.

I use this video as an argument of how wearing red pants gives one super powers.

TxSanshou
10/14/2009 5:04pm,
Its been posted before. In fact, I think we have this in our Video Archives.

I use this video as an argument of how wearing red pants gives one super powers.

Damn my bad didn't come up when i searched

IMightBeWrong
10/14/2009 5:06pm,
Sometimes its hard to find something with the search function because things like "gangster gun fight red pants superpowers" don't always bring this sort of thing right to the top. I just remember it being posted a while back.

TxSanshou
10/14/2009 5:09pm,
Sometimes its hard to find something with the search function because things like "gangster gun fight red pants superpowers" don't always bring this sort of thing right to the top. I just remember it being posted a while back.

OK thanks for the heads up

It is Fake
10/14/2009 5:11pm,
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/vbtube_show.php?do=tube&tubeid=162

The search isn't that terrible, many of the posters are horrible at using the feature.

No, not just you TXsanshou. Many times you have to change the words.

I used Skate then skaters.

dethklok
10/14/2009 6:32pm,
I have yet to have seen this video and thought it great. I fucking hate bitch's who pull guns to settle a dispute they otherwise could never back up. I am glad to see one of these little bitch's get the **** kicked out of them. If more people stood up to these little puke fucks then maybe we could live in a more civil society.

Libertad
10/14/2009 6:46pm,
I would have used the skateboards more, my mate put a guy in hospital when he started a fight with him while he was skating, trucks to the head FTW.

Nice video, What a pansy pulling out that gun though, I'm glad I live in Aus.

Lights Out
10/14/2009 7:05pm,
But the most important thing about this vid is how many times we heard about how unadvisable is going to the ground because -not to mention glass and lava- a bunch of the crook's buddies would appear from nowhere to stomp on you?

Well, it seems it now works the other way around (but you have to be a purple belt at least to effectively pull the buddyplata).

BJJ wins again!!!

Nice GnP, BTW.

Foolish
10/14/2009 7:09pm,
Ok this is a video I found on youtube did not see anything in the search results about it. These skateboarders who were filming that day get in an argument with a gang member. I'm not sure what triggered the argument and you cant really tell from the video, but the gang member pulls a gun on the skater then threatens his brother but luckily the kid and his brother had backgrounds in brazillian jujitsu and judo. Share your thoughts.

YouTube - Gangster vs skater (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uk0woFFGOA)

Here are a few thoughts that I choose to share.

1. I like cake.
2. Red pants do not give you super powers, you need a cape and mask as well.
3. People who learn to hold guns by watching movies and tv should be dragged out behind the barn and kicked in the nuts until they are delirious.
4. It doesn't matter what MA you train or how advanced you think you are, if you try to attack a guy with a gun you are a dumbshit and should receive the same treatment as suggested in 2.
5. People who add "discuss" or anything similar (yes, "share your thoughts" counts) at the end of a post need to receive the same treatment as suggest in 2.

TxSanshou
10/14/2009 9:36pm,
I have yet to have seen this video and thought it great. I fucking hate bitch's who pull guns to settle a dispute they otherwise could never back up. I am glad to see one of these little bitch's get the **** kicked out of them. If more people stood up to these little puke fucks then maybe we could live in a more civil society.

I agree 100% the sad thing is when you fight someone with a gun especially a gang member you pretty much either chose to die then or later, because I would bet any kind of money that kid came back the next day with more people and a couple more guns.

Thats just how gang members operate if someone wants to fight them one on one they use a weapon, if they lose despite using a weapon they come back with more people and more weapons makes me sick.


Here are a few thoughts that I choose to share.


4. It doesn't matter what MA you train or how advanced you think you are, if you try to attack a guy with a gun you are a dumbshit and should receive the same treatment as suggested in 2.
.

I disagree, if someone pulls a gun on you at point blank range and the opportunity to stop them from shooting you presents itself you would be a dumb **** to stand there and let them shoot you.

I say this because if a gang member pulls a gun on you there is a 99% chance that they intend to kill you,if you wan't to lean on the 1% chance that they wont be my guest but the kid in the video apparently didn't like those odds.

Foolish
10/14/2009 10:27pm,
I disagree, if someone pulls a gun on you at point blank range and the opportunity to stop them from shooting you presents itself you would be a dumb **** to stand there and let them shoot you.

I say this because if a gang member pulls a gun on you there is a 99% chance that they intend to kill you,if you wan't to lean on the 1% chance that they wont be my guest but the kid in the video apparently didn't like those odds.

I am guessing 99% is a random number that you pulled out of your ass. If it isn't please quote a source and I will grovel appropriately and beg forgiveness.

Of the statistics I could find none address the intent of the attacker only the outcome of the encounter. In this particular case, if the gang member had intended to kill him rather than just intimidate him it would have been over in the first :30 seconds. Instead I see a lot of posturing and theatrics and intimidation. I suppose this could have been the 1% though.

This first set of numbers I found do not specify handgun but only that the attacker had a firearm. The number shot is significantly less than 99% even if you add in the number that were just shot at.

Offender use of firearms

Of incidents involving offenders with firearms, victims -

were shot (3%)
were shot at but not hit (8%)
were struck with a firearm (4%)
were threatened with a firearm (72%)
did not describe offender's use of firearms (13%)
this can be found here http://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics.php#16 (http://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics.php#16)


Another statement:

For all those who were victimized in a robbery, sexual assault/rape/attempted rape, or aggravated assault, the following was true in 1992:
1.4% homicide
2.8% wounded
95.8% NOT WOUNDED
Said another way, of those victims of nonfatal violent crime who faced an assailant armed with a firearm, only 3% suffered gunshot wounds.

source: http://www.wildelife.com/worth/stats/stats6.html

Granted this second one comes from 1992, but I doubt the 95.8% not wounded has changed much.

The last is from the US Dept. of Justice,

How much crime involves firearms and gunshot wounds?

The BJS National Crime Victimization
Survey (NCVS) data for 1993-97 show
that of the 19.2 million incidents of
nonfatal violent crime, excluding simple
assault --
* 28% were committed with a firearm
* 4% were committed with a firearm and resulted in injury
* less than 1% resulted in gunshot wounds.

This one comes from http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/fidc9397.txt

As I mentioned above, this does not address the intent of the attacker which may change the numbers. The other thing to keep in mind is that when the data is broken down by race and/or socio-economic status the numbers do change but they never approach 99%.

Forgot to mention, I still like cake.

chaosexmachina
10/14/2009 10:54pm,
Its been posted before. In fact, I think we have this in our Video Archives.

I use this video as an argument of how wearing red pants gives one super powers.

That's hilarious. I also have a video of a guy wearing red pants that wins a street fight.

TxSanshou
10/14/2009 11:18pm,
I am guessing 99% is a random number that you pulled out of your ass. If it isn't please quote a source and I will grovel appropriately and beg forgiveness.

Of the statistics I could find none address the intent of the attacker only the outcome of the encounter. In this particular case, if the gang member had intended to kill him rather than just intimidate him it would have been over in the first :30 seconds. Instead I see a lot of posturing and theatrics and intimidation. I suppose this could have been the 1% though.

This first set of numbers I found do not specify handgun but only that the attacker had a firearm. The number shot is significantly less than 99% even if you add in the number that were just shot at.

Offender use of firearms

Of incidents involving offenders with firearms, victims -

were shot (3%)
were shot at but not hit (8%)
were struck with a firearm (4%)
were threatened with a firearm (72%)
did not describe offender's use of firearms (13%)
this can be found here http://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics.php#16 (http://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics.php#16)


Another statement:

For all those who were victimized in a robbery, sexual assault/rape/attempted rape, or aggravated assault, the following was true in 1992:
1.4% homicide
2.8% wounded
95.8% NOT WOUNDED
Said another way, of those victims of nonfatal violent crime who faced an assailant armed with a firearm, only 3% suffered gunshot wounds.

source: http://www.wildelife.com/worth/stats/stats6.html

Granted this second one comes from 1992, but I doubt the 95.8% not wounded has changed much.

The last is from the US Dept. of Justice,

How much crime involves firearms and gunshot wounds?

The BJS National Crime Victimization
Survey (NCVS) data for 1993-97 show
that of the 19.2 million incidents of
nonfatal violent crime, excluding simple
assault --
* 28% were committed with a firearm
* 4% were committed with a firearm and resulted in injury
* less than 1% resulted in gunshot wounds.

This one comes from http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/fidc9397.txt

As I mentioned above, this does not address the intent of the attacker which may change the numbers. The other thing to keep in mind is that when the data is broken down by race and/or socio-economic status the numbers do change but they never approach 99%.

Forgot to mention, I still like cake.

Your entitled to your opinion and thats some very good research and stats you have there but noticed you researched the relation of gunshot wounds and crimes, not altercations involving gang members ,the gang banger was not trying to rape the skater (at least I hope not) or rob him.

If you had researched how often gang members shoot people they get into altercations with you would have seen some different numbers. Youth Gangs and Violence Office of juvenile justice-"In Los Angeles, the proportion of gang-related homicides among youth involving firearms increased from 71 percent in 1979 to 95 percent in 1994, mainly because of the increased use of handguns, particularly semiautomatics"

Granted this is from 94 and the rates have decreased since then, but from this we can deduce that in 95% of gang related homicides a fire arm of some sort was used, hence if a gang member pulled a gun on you it was extremely likely that he intended to kill you. This is a trend seen more in young gang members more so then adult gang members whos motives are usually burglary or rape, versus teen gang members who usually need to earn respect by killing people who try and disrespect them.

So yeah I will admit that 99% was a number I pulled out of my ass but upon researching the stats we see that I was only off by 4%.

Foolish
10/14/2009 11:44pm,
Your entitled to your opinion and thats some very good research and stats you have there but noticed you researched the relation of gunshot wounds and crimes, not altercations involving gang members ,the gang banger was not trying to rape the skater (at least I hope not) or rob him.

If you had researched how often gang members shoot people they get into altercations with you would have seen some different numbers. Youth Gangs and Violence Office of juvenile justice-"In Los Angeles, the proportion of gang-related homicides among youth involving firearms increased from 71 percent in 1979 to 95 percent in 1994, mainly because of the increased use of handguns, particularly semiautomatics"

Granted this is from 94 and the rates have decreased since then, but from this we can deduce that in 95% of gang related homicides a fire arm of some sort was used, hence if a gang member pulled a gun on you it was extremely likely that he intended to kill you. This is a trend seen more in young gang members more so then adult gang members whos motives are usually burglary or rape, versus teen gang members who usually need to earn respect by killing people who try and disrespect them.

So yeah I will admit that 99% was a number I pulled out of my ass but upon researching the stats we see that I was only off by 4%.

The source you are quoting is here: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/jjjournal/jjjournal1297/gang.html

I see the 95%, but you are reading the wrong info from it. 95% of gang related homicides are firearms. It simply says that if someone dies in a gang related crime, 95% of the time they will have been killed by a gun.

It does not say that 95% of the time a gun comes out someone dies. It says absolutely nothing about the number of non-fatal gunshot wounds, or the number of times gun was fired and missed, or the number of times a gun crime resulted in no injury at all.

So if you want to stick to 99% or 95% I would suggest you find a source that says what you think it says.

battlefields
10/14/2009 11:59pm,
Even if there is less than 1% chance of you getting shot, arguing the statistical probability of being shot when you can remove the possibility in the first place is fucking stupid.