Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not everyone should be trained.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Not everyone should be trained.

    I made this post on several BJJ instructors' feeds:

    "6pm Women Self-Defense Class, $50
    7pm How to Be An Effective Rapist, $50
    20% Discount off if you attend both classes."

    No one objected to the messaging.

    But, I am curious, what it is we think we do,
    when we train known gangbangers,
    known sexual predators,
    people who are known to commit B&E as their regular income stream,
    or those that glamorize violence on police?

    When we train violent and/or criminal people to be able to commit violence more effectively, we are accomplices...

    Sometimes, turning down the $100 a month is the integrity move.
    Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 12/07/2018 10:47pm, .

    #2
    Originally posted by Krampus View Post
    I made this post on several BJJ instructors' feeds:

    "6pm Women Self-Defense Class, $50
    7pm How to Be An Effective Rapist, $50
    20% Discount off if you attend both classes."

    No one objected to the messaging.

    But, I am curious, what it is we think we do,
    when we train known gangbangers,
    known sexual predators,
    people who are known to commit B&E as their regular income stream,
    or those that glamorize violence on police?

    When we train violent and/or criminal people to be able to commit violence more effectively, we are accomplices...

    Sometimes, turning down the $100 a month is the integrity move.
    Profit!

    Comment


      #3
      At least you have put it out there for consideration. The good guys like you won’t even think twice about where they draw a line but it may make those who haven’t considered it take a moment to reflect. Flip side - could you make a difference in that person’s life and get them off the naughty track, expose them to better community?

      All I’ve witnessed were three boozy people turning up to the dojo one night. You could smell the alcohol wafting off them. I was mortified when Sensei allowed them to train with us, all while beaming with joy at them. Then realised his logic. Sent them home with beatings aplenty. I (being the only one without a penis) was not allowed anywhere near them.

      Comment


        #4
        Giving people a new friend group has the potential to be a positive influence on them. Also I think a similar argument could be made against training police and military based on your news as to what those groups do. Ultimately I think that the person you are stops mattering when you step on the mat. It's neutral ground in my view.

        Comment


          #5

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Lily View Post
            that does include a police check.

            Comment


              #7
              Police checks are bullshit. What if it was a past crime and that person was on the road to being a better person? Here in victoria nearly every single job requires a police check before somone gets hired. If you have a conviction then your screwed because an employer will choose somone that hasnt had priors, and then people wonder why criminals become repeat offenders.

              I’ve never been in trouble with the law but i’ve met a few guys who have done time. If somone does something stupid when they were younger or something it pretty much screws them for life no matter how much they change.

              Comment


                #8
                Totally disagree with the two of you. If I was an instructor, I would want the information, treat it discretely and make a decision based upon the police check, an interview with the candidate and an assessment about where they are at present.

                Do you want a pedo, a purveyor of child porn, someone involved in an armed crime to be working in a day care centre, in a MA setting with kids without at least knowing the facts and then making a decision?

                Kravbizarre - just 3 weeks ago a 7 year old Sydney girl went to the bathroom for a break during dance class. She was raped and filmed by a man who should not have been given parole. A passerby who came to help was stabbed several times. Our system is broken. Nothing to hide then front up.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Krampus View Post
                  I made this post on several BJJ instructors' feeds:

                  "6pm Women Self-Defense Class, $50
                  7pm How to Be An Effective Rapist, $50
                  20% Discount off if you attend both classes."
                  Dan Severn's seminar fees seem pretty reasonable.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Lily View Post
                    Do you want a pedo, a purveyor of child porn, someone involved in an armed crime to be working in a day care centre,

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Krampus View Post
                      I made this post on several BJJ instructors' feeds:

                      "6pm Women Self-Defense Class, $50
                      7pm How to Be An Effective Rapist, $50
                      20% Discount off if you attend both classes."

                      No one objected to the messaging.

                      But, I am curious, what it is we think we do,
                      when we train known gangbangers,
                      known sexual predators,
                      people who are known to commit B&E as their regular income stream,
                      or those that glamorize violence on police?

                      When we train violent and/or criminal people to be able to commit violence more effectively, we are accomplices...

                      Sometimes, turning down the $100 a month is the integrity move.

                      Hmm?
                      What we think we do?
                      We teach them more effective physical skills, hopefully in an environment that is conducive to helping them make better life choices and harm fewer people. Hopefully if this continues long enough they wind up as better people, but there are no guarantees of this.

                      You are not an accomplice to someone else's actions by teaching them skills or making means publicly available. That is simply ridiculous.
                      Ted Kazinsky's chemistry professors were not accomplices. And Mikhail Kalashnikov was not a terrorist.
                      Ultimately the responsibility for each persons choices is their own. Trying to take on some portion of someone else's responsibility not only burdens you, it diminishes them as a person.
                      Which of course is the point. When we diminish other people, it makes it easier to deal with them, but it doesn't change the reality that they are just people making choices. People choose every day how to behave toward each other and every black-hearted villain or white knight you have ever read about in history was just a person making choices that we later interpret as we wish.
                      Defense attorneys do not become criminals by providing a vigorous and effective defense that gets their client acquitted. In fact, they can become criminals by NOT doing that very thing for their clients.
                      And that is someone acting, not only to provide a service but as a vigorous advocate that WILL likely aid in the commission future crimes and would be, in this hypothetical that occurs every day, aiding the criminal in getting away with past crimes.
                      Ultimately unless someones life choices outside the gym follow them in to the gym, your responsibility is to maintain a safe training environment, not to be the moral police of your students lives.

                      Now some people may CHOOSE, of their own volition, to maintain a higher moral standard among those they associate with, including their students. But to state or imply any responsibility from those students actions applies to the instructors trying to make a living, some of them in places where turning away those with a criminal background would mean possibly an empty school, is to my mind unconscionable.
                      Last edited by AcerTempest; 12/09/2018 12:42pm, . Reason: Added the word acquitted

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by AcerTempest View Post
                        Hmm?
                        What we think we do?
                        We teach them more effective physical skills, hopefully in an environment that is conducive to helping them make better life choices and harm fewer people. Hopefully if this continues long enough they wind up as better people, but there are no guarantees of this.

                        You are not an accomplice to someone else's actions by teaching them skills or making means publicly available. That is simply ridiculous.
                        Ted Kazinsky's chemistry professors were not accomplices. And Mikhail Kalashnikov was not a terrorist.
                        Ultimately the responsibility for each persons choices is their own. Trying to take on some portion of someone else's responsibility not only burdens you, it diminishes them as a person.
                        Which of course is the point. When we diminish other people, it makes it easier to deal with them, but it doesn't change the reality that they are just people making choices. People choose every day how to behave toward each other and every black-hearted villain or white knight you have ever read about in history was just a person making choices that we later interpret as we wish.
                        Defense attorneys do not become criminals by providing a vigorous and effective defense that gets their client acquitted. In fact, they can become criminals by NOT doing that very thing for their clients.
                        And that is someone acting, not only to provide a service but as a vigorous advocate that WILL likely aid in the commission future crimes and would be, in this hypothetical that occurs every day, aiding the criminal in getting away with past crimes.
                        Ultimately unless someones life choices outside the gym follow them in to the gym, your responsibility is to maintain a safe training environment, not to be the moral police of your students lives.

                        Now some people may CHOOSE, of their own volition, to maintain a higher moral standard among those they associate with, including their students. But to state or imply any responsibility from those students actions applies to the instructors trying to make a living, some of them in places where turning away those with a criminal background would mean possibly an empty school, is to my mind unconscionable.
                        Nonsense, it is entirely reasonable to turn away people that an instructor has reason to believe are out there gang banging, or committing B&E's, or are a sexual predator, etc.

                        $100 a month is not worth being the person that trains that type of violent criminal to be able to commit violence more effectively.
                        Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 12/09/2018 1:19pm, .

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Krampus View Post
                          Nonsense, it is entirely reasonable to turn away people that an instructor has reason to believe is out there gang banging, or committing B&E's, or is a sexual predator, etc.

                          $100 a month is not worth being the person that trains that type of violent criminal to be able to commit violence more effectively.
                          It is entirely reasonable for the instructor to CHOOSE to do so. It is entirely UNREASONABLE for someone to REQUIRE if of them, or to impugn their character because they will not or cannot.

                          Perhaps it is not a $100 dollars a month, because that person has 6+ friends at the school that will leave when they do. Perhaps that $100 is the difference between paying for a needed prescription medication every month and not.
                          It doesn't matter.
                          The responsibility of the instructor is to teach and provide a safe learning environment, and perhaps to be a good example to their students, though even that is debatable.
                          It is NOT to morally police them, or to turn down needed income because they disagree with their life choices. Now, you may, at your school, CHOOSE to turn away those you don't wish to associate with. But they will simply go down the street to someone else.
                          If your income is such that you can afford the loss in order to not be associate with them, and your conscience is such that it will be assuaged by choosing so, then do it.
                          But it is entirely unreasonable to say that others MUST follow you in this, or even that they should. It would be the same as me saying that that in order to join my school you MUST be Catholic and not ex-communicated.
                          Some school owners may do this, but I assume you would find it ridiculous and simply not attend or promote such a school.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by AcerTempest View Post
                            It is entirely reasonable for the instructor to CHOOSE to do so. It is entirely UNREASONABLE for someone to REQUIRE if of them, or to impugn their character because they will not or cannot.

                            Perhaps it is not a $100 dollars a month, because that person has 6+ friends at the school that will leave when they do. Perhaps that $100 is the difference between paying for a needed prescription medication every month and not.
                            It doesn't matter.
                            The responsibility of the instructor is to teach and provide a safe learning environment, and perhaps to be a good example to their students, though even that is debatable.
                            It is NOT to morally police them, or to turn down needed income because they disagree with their life choices. Now, you may, at your school, CHOOSE to turn away those you don't wish to associate with. But they will simply go down the street to someone else.
                            If your income is such that you can afford the loss in order to not be associate with them, and your conscience is such that it will be assuaged by choosing so, then do it.
                            But it is entirely unreasonable to say that others MUST follow you in this, or even that they should. It would be the same as me saying that that in order to join my school you MUST be Catholic and not ex-communicated.
                            Some school owners may do this, but I assume you would find it ridiculous and simply not attend or promote such a school.
                            It’s not that complicated.

                            Don’t train known gang bangers, sexual predators, known B&E people, or known violent criminals to commit violence more effectively.

                            An instructor that does so, particularly for extra money, is probably a piece of shit, or very stupid, or more likely, both.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              How do you feel about training military guys to commit violence more effectively?

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X