search results matching tag: disarm

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (34)     Sift Talk (5)     Blogs (6)     Comments (206)   

Wushu Performance Seems Extremely Dangerous

Chinese Police release Knife Defense training video

ChaosEngine says...

You only need to get far enough away until the train hits the next station. I’ve spent years training in knife disarms, and there’s no way I’d do anything but run like hell unless I had no other choice.

spawnflagger said:

Unfortunately this method doesn't work on Trains/Subways.

Why The Cops Won't Help You When You're Getting Stabbed

jwray says...

Cops would have been 100% justified in shooting gelman at any point after he started swinging his knife towards the narrator and before the narrator disarmed him.. Or at least kicking the shit out of him as necessary to stop his killing spree. Due process is for after the perp has been apprehended.

Why The Cops Won't Help You When You're Getting Stabbed

newtboy says...

Um...this ended his 28 hour long stabbing spree, the reason the cops were there and why they recognized him.....sounds like "something stupid"and illegal to me, as did pulling the knife and stabbing people right in front of them, which they continued to just watch until citizens detained and disarmed him, and only then did they take him away, ignoring the mortal wounds he caused to those citizens, so they were not correct at all, he was a known armed public threat that they didn't even warn others about, they just cowered behind the door out of fear of a non existent gun, then offered no assistance to the man that just did their job....and took credit for it....sorry.
I think you need to watch again, assuming you watched at all, you missed literally everything.

bigbikeman said:

Ok, so....

Cops should just jump on people they think *might* commit a crime because: Reasons .

Good call, citizens!

Due process. Due fucking process.
It exists for reasons beyond your cynical worldview...or even worst case scenarios. It exists to protect the rest of us. The majority.

The cops were right there to take the guy away once he did something stupid. They were also "correct" in not doing anything beforehand. Right before he pulled a knife and stabbed someone, he was just being an asshole, nothing more. That's not illegal. Sorry.

and no: you don't want the police "protecting" you. That's what the Mafia does.

So what's the alternative? Preemptive police takedowns? That happens too, and people scream all the same.

Difference is: I'd rather live in a free society where cops wait for somebody (maybe me) to actually do something wrong, than just leave it up to them to decide when you (or I) *might* be a risk, and then taze or shoot you or me dead.

The police are not there to keep you safe. For one, there is no such thing as "safe" in absolute terms, and in my opinion, if there was, you sure as shit don't want the state prescribing that "safety".

But...that's just my opinion.

Bouncer vs. Gunman

CrushBug says...

Yeah, while there is a little irony there, it's not like they are trained in disarming or are expected to handled armed suspects. Security in a bar is about dealing with drunks.

Nexxus said:

And the lady with the Security shirt heads for the hills. That's some security!

Authentic Medieval Sword Techniques

Jinx says...

I don't know, but I've seen it before in other demonstrations or illustrations so they must have had good gloves . I figure that the blade was probably only kept sharp at the tip.

from wiki on the ineffectiveness of cutting slashes against full plate:
"To overcome this problem, swords began to be used primarily for thrusting. The weapon was used in the half-sword, with one or both hands on the blade. This increased the accuracy and strength of thrusts and provided more leverage for Ringen am Schwert or "wrestling at/with the sword". This technique combines the use of the sword with wrestling, providing opportunities to trip, disarm, break, or throw an opponent and place them in a less offensively and defensively capable position. During half-swording, the entirety of the sword works as a weapon, including the pommel and crossguard. One example how a sword can be used this way is to thrust the tip of the crossguard at the opponent's head right after parrying a stroke. Another technique would be the Mordstreich (lit. "murder stroke"), where the weapon is held by the blade (hilt, pommel and crossguard serving as an improvised hammer head) and swung, taking advantage of the balance being close to the hilt to increase the concussive effect."

ChaosEngine said:

I don't know much about HEMA, but why would you have a guard that requires you to hold the blade?

I can understand it on a single-edged blade but on a double-edged sword?

Bill Maher - Dan Savage

criticalthud says...

to be fair, every president finds out change is a lot harder than they think it will be, given the stranglehold of a 2 party system.

here's a thought:
Rename the Green Party the "Conservative Party"
why?
#1 it's true, and it disarms the opposition while empowering a 3rd party, which is something that would be quite helpful to push change through.
#2 Politics is basically a war of semanitcs. Win the war on semantics, win the war.

Plenty o' folk will vote Conservative, just cause of the word.
Once there is a viable 3rd party, then change will be a reality.

Mordhaus said:

True, it seems it is pretty hard to get someone who talks change but still walks the walk once they get in office.

djsunkid (Member Profile)

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your comment on Escaped chimp disarms zookeeper has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

Teen Rides Horse Through Snowstorm To Help Stuck Truck Drive

dannym3141 says...

I find myself disarmed and slightly enthralled by the way she speaks. I feel like I'd trust her with my bank details and not even blame her if some money went missing - it couldn't possibly be her, listen to her innocent voice!

She'd make an amazing criminal à la Primal Fear.

The Perfectionist Trap

oblio70 says...

Back in Design Studio (Arch), my prolific friend described the differences in our approaches to me so well.

The project was a target out in the wilderness, and at the start, he'd shut his eyes and start shooting wildly at the location of the target, only to open his eyes and see that it had been moving the whole time.

I, however as he saw me, would look for the mechanisms that kept the thing in motion, take one shot and disarm it completely, as I lined up my crosshairs...only to be met by the sound of the buzzer. Time.

It was time to change...he had 3-5 "false" solutions, whereas I had the thing (supposedly) solved, but not fully complete most of the time...stuck in my head, where it did no good. I had lost out on so much experience with the potential for developing wisdom. I had to learn to stop seeking Truth, whatever that may be, and run with truth as what was at hand, if that makes sense.

Sarah Palin Crashes & Burns

Babymech says...

That or just your mom using social media.

Edit:
Heck, even those of us who pride ourselves on our health, still experience occasional infirmity. I count myself among those people - in fact, I believe that I suffer these dips more often than many. There is an ironic aptness, I have often felt, in the fact that I named my daughter 'Grace' - a virtue I find myself lacking all too frequently.

Just recently, when rock-running, I tripped over my own two feet and fell face first to the ground. I received excellent medical care and recovered, but if I were of a progressive mindset, I would no doubt find the very idea of someone inquiring as to my recovery both condescending and sexist. I would also be glad that Hillary can evade that kind of questioning, thanks to the biased support she receives from the pro-establishment media which shields her from legitimate inquiries. The fact that she is running for the highest office in our nation does not seem to persuade the media that these questions are legitimate and necessary to pose.

If you ask me, the real sexism on display now is the odd reluctance of the media to ask hard-hitting questions, and its willingness to accept the ridiculous excuses offered by Hillary Clinton's campaign for the lack of proper e-mail management. Rather than demand the real contents of those e-mails, the media is content to accept a disarming and stereotypical list of everyday 'women's activities' such as yoga or wedding planning, for fear that if they point out the obvious ridiculousness here, they will be lambasted as sexist.

#SAD

shagen454 said:

It makes sense in the way that a hyper active kindergartner makes sense.

Bill Maher: Who Needs Guns?

SDGundamX says...

To understand the wording of the second amendment, you have to take into account the history behind it. I'm not sure how familiar you are with American history, but this scholarly article is a great read on the topic, and demonstrates that guns have been kept and regulated (the most important terms of the amendment that often get completely overlooked by guns rights advocates) by Americans for both personal and collective defense since the Colonial period.

It's important to note that the Revolutionary War was literally started at Lexington and Concord when the British government, "Came fer our gunz!" That event informs a great deal of the rhetoric, and it is not at all an exaggeration to say that had the British government successfully disarmed the populace earlier, the Revolution might never have had a chance for success.

Regardless, there are an overwhelming number of legal precedents now that support the notion that the Constitution allows guns to be owned by U.S. citizens for self-defense purposes. That horse has long been out of the barn, so arguing that the constitution does not specifically use the words "self-defense" is a complete waste of time. What is not a waste of time is arguing how far the government (state and federal) can go in "regulating" the sale, carrying, and use of firearms.

ChaosEngine said:

"The whole point of the second amendment... is so we can defend ourselves"

No, it's not. Have you even read your own constitution?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

There's nothing in there about self-defence. It's so that you can be drafted into a citizen militia to protect the state.

And every time I hear this argument, I thank my lucky stars that I don't live in a country where people are actually this paranoid.

Samantha Bee on Orlando - Again? Again.

Samantha Bee on Orlando - Again? Again.

ChaosEngine says...

But hey getting on a plane isn't a constitutional right, but apparently being able to murder the fuck out of your fellow citizens is!
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Obama-isnt-looking-to-disarm-you

How to subdue a machete-wielding man without killing him

poolcleaner says...

I was hoping for a good old fashioned English sword fight and a display of a disarming technique. Instead there are a bunch of fat old men waddling around waiting for the invincibility shields. I'm disappointed in you, England. You used to be so badass.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon