This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
You don’t have to spend a lifetime doing bjj, the rear naked choke is a move taught to beginners. The way it’s taught involves practicing it on other people, you see an instantaneous reaction from the other person the moment you apply pressure. It’s essentially impossible to learn the move without understanding what it does.
This is not to say I feel no sympathy for people defending themselves against a crazy person on the train, being a commuter myself, but the idea that someone could rear naked choke another person for two minutes and be surprised it was lethal is not realistic. The question is whether lethal force was warranted in the situation.
Did we watch the same video? I don't see a man being held still and unconscious for two minutes, I see a man struggling against restraint for two minutes that is eventually choked out. Here's the full video to the best of my knowledge. Until approximately the last 15-20 seconds of the video, he's still visibly struggling, which is presumably why the guy who applied the choke did not release it.
At this stage, I don't think we have sufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding whether reasonable people would have believed that the threat had ended.
He's struggling, but he's unconscious. It's not clear to an untrained eye, and from time to time even MMA/jiu jitsu refs will fail to recognize that the person struggling isn't conscious anymore, so it's understandable that these guys didn't realize that he was unconscious.
However, to someone who has experience with this stuff, it's very clear that the guy is unconscious for at least two minutes and twenty seconds of being choked.
More options
Context Copy link
It doesn't look like has the choke on perfectly in the first part, though we can't really see it the second minute.
I agree, and as per my earlier comment I don't even have an opinion on whether he was unwarranted in using lethal force in the situation. My objection is to the idea that any trained person wouldn't understand that the rear naked choke isn't meant to restrain someone, it has deadly potential if held continuously. From his use of the move and his leg wrap around the guy's legs he clearly has training.
I've been training jiu jitsu for the better part of a decade now, and I disagree. The RNC and hooks combo is common enough that a lot of people who don't train have seen it on UFC, and his execution is sloppy enough in more than one way (against a basically non-resisting opponent, by that time) that I find it hard to believe that he had any significant amount of training.
Anyone that trains will know that you shouldn't be holding a legit RNC tight for minutes after the guy has gone unconscious. However, I find it to be very unlikely that they knew the homeless man was unconscious. The homeless man was still moving, and even professional MMA refs occasionally fail to recognize that the competitor being choked is only jerking around unconsciously. If you have little to no training, and a piss poor RNC (which probably didn't put him out quickly), and the guy you're trying to choke keeps flailing around.... and you don't have have enough years in jiu jitsu to have seen people keep fighting when unconscious, then it's pretty easy to conclude that you just aren't successfully strangling him.
Teachmegrappling guy agrees
More options
Context Copy link
Honestly, I think that's reading too much into it. I think it's perfectly possible to have a long and successful martial arts career without ever needing to internalize the potential lethality of any hold if it were used beyond the point of tapping out, because it never comes to that in organized settings.
I honestly really don't think that's true, when you practice this live it's totally normal to see people pass out if they're stubborn or don't tap out quickly enough. Even if you just watch the sport you'll see this happen regularly.
I disagree. I did various martial arts for over a decade and only ever choked a person out once. People all tap out before that or tug their chin in and you just let go after a while.
From your above comment you did judo? How often are rear naked chokes used? I thought pushing down on the back head as part of a choke was fully banned in judo tbh. I've seen people go out more times than I can count in bjj and have come close to passing out myself.
Mostly, but I dabbled in many others. Low-level judo is very much free-for-all, you do whatever you want, some sparring, some self-defense, rarely competition training where rules are actually important. And there are a lot of people coming from other sports, such as BJJ.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Hm. Probably true.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yeah, fair, I would expect even a casual observer of mixed martial arts to have noticed that this is probably going to be very bad for someone if not released quickly.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Other willing people, who are playing along. Which was not the case here. Even if the Marine had been taught the move in a controlled situation and practiced it on other people, if the homeless guy didn't react the way the Marine had been taught, the Marine would be in uncharted territory at that point.
No, you practice it live too. We have children do this, I’d be shocked if actual marines don’t as well.
what? like you go to random strangers and choke them to see how someone in an uncontrolled situation would react?
No, you spar, where you're trying to attack another person who is resisting you and trying to attack you. This is a very far cry from "having other people play along," and you regularly see people pass out from using this move in sparring, making it extremely unlikely that anyone would be familiar with it and not understand what it does.
I've said several times in this thread I don't have a stance on whether his response was right or wrong, at least until more info comes out, because if someone attacks you in real life sometimes lethal force is warranted. What I question is that he wasn't aware that this move had lethal implications, it's genuinely really clear to anyone who's used it. The "how would people react in an uncontrolled situation vs a controlled situation?" isn't the question here, it's "how would someone's bloodflow react to this move in an uncontrolled vs controlled situation?", to which the answer is "the same".
A spar is still a simulation of a fight. Maybe a pretty good simulation of a fight, but a simulation nonetheless. See also 2-Gun Action Challenge Match-style shooting competitions; they're probably as close as you can get to replicating the stress of real-life combat, but still falling short of the real-ass thing.
But the guys in the 2-Gun Action Challenges understand that guns are lethal even without actually being shot, and someone who has trained or sparred in bjj would understand the implications of a rear naked choke hold.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link