Depends on how much you've practiced the move and how well the punch is thrown. All told, that simple throw should take about one second for a practiced person. Mind you, if the opponent is trained, of course he won't overstretch a punch like that, but that's how you know where you stand in a fight.SextusMaximus said:You realise that lock is completely ineffective right? Like you'd only be able to employ it on a guy who had never HEARD of the concept of fighting before?rhizhim said:this.DoPo said:I'd might be scared. I'm a fairly big guy so if another one like started punching me, it could be really scary. Then again, I have a higher pain tolerance for punching, so chances are that it would just be annoying.miketehmage said:If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly
Why do I have to hit them back though? What if I don't hit them back and still defend myself? You're imposing a false dilemma here - I can defend myself without punching people. Well I can defend myself from punches, at least. Block and if need be, try to restrain them. If the other party continues, maybe throw in some hits of my own. But defence =/= hitting stuff. Trust me.miketehmage said:If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?
Oh, and I wouldn't start hitting, because I'm a fairly big guy. Not that I'm a pacifist but I could really hurt somebody if provoked. That's how I grew up, so that's how I tend to do stuff now.
get the fucker person into a lock
![]()
and hold him there until he calms down.
-----------------------------------
since you got in a 'fight' with no chance to talk your way out of it,
he either is drunk or in rage. both states where you can easily overwhelm him since they are likely to do errors.
being a parcifist does not mean you have to be someones *****.
it mean more that violence is the last of your options and if used, it should incapacitate your opponent just enough to give you a head start.
It might be a joke poster but I'm just checking.
I'm not a pacifist, but I do have to ask: why is your only defense an offense? Why are your only options to stand there and take it or to hit him back?miketehmage said:Okay so I've been lurking around these forums for a while now and there seems to be a fair few pacifists on here so I'd like to ask you all something.
If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly, would you hit them back?
If the answer is no due to fear, I'm not interested, if however the answer is no due to restraint and beliefs, could you explain that to me?
If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?
Let's try to keep this civil people
EDIT: To clear this up for some people who have been asking. I mean if it is unprovoked and you don't know the person.
I'd also like to point out that I don't go around looking for fights, I think some of you may have been getting the wrong impression from this post![]()
Eh, call it what you will. Just because I won't hit a guy doesn't mean I'll refrain from insulting him, that's just what I do. Besides if I'd have actually fought back me and him would both have gotten punished. As it was, only he got any kind of punishment while I got off totally free.ElPatron said:/facepalmReservoirAngel said:I did, however, continue to mouth off to him though.
I'm sorry, I think your mistook "pacifist" for "rubbish strategist". That's not turning the other cheek, that's pulling the pants down and showing both cheeks.
Kappa?Use_Imagination_here said:i know you're not serious but there are some fucked up people on this site so I have to ask.somonels said:No, I don't believe in violence... but then again I don't consider taking a life as violence, I see it as making someone a favor.
>school punishmentReservoirAngel said:So that was kind of a strategy on my part. I could take whatever he could dish out and he'd end up in the shit because of the whole "punching me repeatedly" thing.
Well your phrasing was a bit odd, but if thats your genuine philosphy than I respect that. It's just that the very short way you said it made it sound like a bad joke (no offense) about thinking that taking someones life is doing them a favour because... Life sucks I guess? If you do genuingly believe that and I misunderstood what you said again, well personally I'd find that disgusting but I still believe in your right to your opinion.somonels said:Kappa?Use_Imagination_here said:i know you're not serious but there are some fucked up people on this site so I have to ask.somonels said:No, I don't believe in violence... but then again I don't consider taking a life as violence, I see it as making someone a favor.
I was serious, though the message might not be understood in the same way I intended it to be.
I don't believe in violence; I do believe that sometimes lives have to be taken; I do not use the technical meaning of violence; taking a life is just like any other action, with both negative and positive aspects. Which part do you find so appalling?
No offense taken, I do like bad jokes, but the original post explicitly says 'doing someone a favor,' as in: someone always benefits from the death of another. I do adhere to a 'life sucks' philosophy and am a notorious misanthrope but to my understanding those things, without a belief in something beyond death, create a conflict involving taking lives, but essentially my motto is: "Life sucks, so keep on living it."Use_Imagination_here said:Well your phrasing was a bit odd, but if thats your genuine philosphy than I respect that. It's just that the very short way you said it made it sound like a bad joke (no offense) about thinking that taking someones life is doing them a favour because... Life sucks I guess? If you do genuingly believe that and I misunderstood what you said again, well personally I'd find that disgusting but I still believe in your right to your opinion.somonels said:Kappa?Use_Imagination_here said:i know you're not serious but there are some fucked up people on this site so I have to ask.somonels said:No, I don't believe in violence... but then again I don't consider taking a life as violence, I see it as making someone a favor.
I was serious, though the message might not be understood in the same way I intended it to be.
I don't believe in violence; I do believe that sometimes lives have to be taken; I do not use the technical meaning of violence; taking a life is just like any other action, with both negative and positive aspects. Which part do you find so appalling?
I think AHNOLD would TAHMINATE himself and it would result in the best fight ever.GamerMage said:That avatar of yours combined with that statement makes think of Arnold saying that. LOLhenritje said:I would hit back. I'm a pacifist but have no problems with defending myself.
So yes, I am a pacifist. However, before I believe in non-violence, I believe people should protect themselves and those they love. If that involves violence... well. One day that will be fixed.miketehmage said:If the answer is no due to fear, I'm not interested, if however the answer is no due to restraint and beliefs, could you explain that to me?
If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?