US Self Defence nut gets banned from the UK

[Coito ergo sum]

Seems to me he's advocating offensive techniques designed to fuck people up if they try attack you.

If they try to attack you, how is your fighting back an "offensive technique?"

Nothing wrong with that. It's better than risking yourself in an untrained scuffle or brawl which can lead to your untimely death. We were always trained that it's better to be able to fuck the other guy up quickly without losing energy and get out of there.

Although... My teacher was a psycho.

Well, right, if someone attacks you, you fuck their world up, if you can. And, that is good, right and just. I am not even a fighting type of person, and I can't imagine why anyone would think that the victim has an obligation to take it in the nuts.

[Svartalf]

I'm not an aggressive kind of person, but if I ever have to defend myself, I need to be able to kill them, fast, because If I win in the first place, I have already beaten the odds and want to take no chance that there could be a revenge match.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm amazed at the number of brits who piss themselves defending brazen authoritarian bs the moment it's THEIR brazen authoritarian bs. Get over yourselves.

The US doesn't even have a law like this. "Not conducive to the public good?" I mean, are you fucking kidding me? What's next? "Not well-directed toward happiness?"

[Animavore]

Seems to me he's advocating offensive techniques designed to fuck people up if they try attack you.

If they try to attack you, how is your fighting back an "offensive technique?"

Nothing wrong with that. It's better than risking yourself in an untrained scuffle or brawl which can lead to your untimely death. We were always trained that it's better to be able to fuck the other guy up quickly without losing energy and get out of there.

Although... My teacher was a psycho.

Well, right, if someone attacks you, you fuck their world up, if you can. And, that is good, right and just. I am not even a fighting type of person, and I can't imagine why anyone would think that the victim has an obligation to take it in the nuts.

I've nothing wrong with the principle. It's just my teacher actually is a genuine, dangerous psycho who would attack someone he felt didn't give him due respect, he mistook fear for respect.

Kinda like Frank Sinatra.

[MrJonno]

Imagine if the US created such a vague and arbitrary rule. "not conducive to the public good" and you can't come to the United States. The outrage, we all know, would be palpable. Fuck - according to most of the Yerpeeins, we can't even ask for fucking identification, and we need to extend them public benefits, pay for their college education, and give them driving licenses.

From the US government web site their equivalent is
DHS has carefully developed the ESTA program to ensure that only those individuals who are ineligible to travel to the United States under the VWP or those whose travel would pose a law enforcement or security risk are refused an ESTAa

This has been used to ban environmentalist who campaign to stop airport expansions, To me there is no difference been 'security' and 'public good' both are as vague as each other.

Yes UK immigration is inconsistant, mainly letting people in who they shouldn't but refusing entry to someone whose definition of self defence is teaching people to kill sound a pretty good person to keep out

[Coito ergo sum]

Yeah, but the Chairman of the Board could sing. So...

...I don't know where I was going with that. But, I've had several Coronas.

[Coito ergo sum]

Imagine if the US created such a vague and arbitrary rule. "not conducive to the public good" and you can't come to the United States. The outrage, we all know, would be palpable. Fuck - according to most of the Yerpeeins, we can't even ask for fucking identification, and we need to extend them public benefits, pay for their college education, and give them driving licenses.

From the US government web site their equivalent is
DHS has carefully developed the ESTA program to ensure that only those individuals who are ineligible to travel to the United States under the VWP or those whose travel would pose a law enforcement or security risk are refused an ESTAa

This has been used to ban environmentalist who campaign to stop airport expansions, To me there is no difference been 'security' and 'public good' both are as vague as each other.

Yes UK immigration is inconsistant, mainly letting people in who they shouldn't but refusing entry to someone whose definition of self defence is teaching people to kill sound a pretty good person to keep out

That's not a statement of US law. That's a summary of what the law is intended to do. They can't ban someone under the bald assertion that someone "poses a law enforcement or security risk" - there are defined parameters as to exactly what constitutes a law enforcement and security risk. "Security" is not the standard - the person has to be a criminal or someone advocating the imminent commission of a crime, not just changes in laws.

The environmentalist you referred to, I believe, was John Stewart, who was first escorted off of his flight because of a supposed threat he made against the President of the United States. There may have been a misunderstanding in that regard, but the result was that his "visa waiver" was revoked. He was not "banned" from the US, and all he had to do was go back to London and apply for a visa.

[mistermack]

I made the point earlier that there would be nothing wrong with martial arts, if it was sound, sensible, balanced people who took it up. The problem is that it's always the unbalanced wankers who go mad for it.
If it was balanced people who were likely to go to this guy's seminars, the government would have no reason to ban him.
So the government obviously agrees with me.

It's therefore clearly the official UK government position, that martial arts fans are unbalanced loonies.

You don't need to take my word for it, it's official.

[MrJonno]

From what I can gather from a quick google the Home Secretary has a lot of power in banning someone from entry in the UK but its a hell of a lot harder to throw them out even if they entered illegally guess we don't like taking any chances.

I've always been told border staff at the US can turn down anyone for entry in the US without reason and without any right to appeal. While thats a bit of a bummer I've never considered being able to enter someone else country as a right

[Seth]

It must be a lonely place in your head, Seth.

How so? Because I choose to serve up a heaping helping of vitriol and insult towards the UK in response to similar insults hurled at the US? It's just pure tit for tat retribution for the anti-American idiocy spouted here so often.

Sauce, goose, gander.

[Seth]

Strange view of history I must say. US isolationism, anyone?

About fucking time too. I'm tired of paying for the US to be the world's policeman because the rest of the planet is too cowardly or parsimonious to do it themselves.

All the rest of y'all can go fuck each other for the next century or two, I think it's time the US sat it out and watched y'all implode and self-destruct in an orgy of Socialist deficit spending and moral cowardice. We can get along just fine without you.

[Animavore]

I always thought UK and US were fuck-buddies.
I guess UK decided it wanted a serious relationship and US was like, Fuck that, man. I can get all the pussy I want. And UK, bitter, rejected and jealous got sour and started saying nasty things to get back at them.

[Seth]

Seems to me he's advocating offensive techniques designed to fuck people up if they try attack you.


Nothing wrong with that. It's better than risking yourself in an untrained scuffle or brawl which can lead to your untimely death. We were always trained that it's better to be able to fuck the other guy up quickly without losing energy and get out of there.

Although... My teacher was a psycho.

Krav Maga does exactly that. It teaches you how to seriously fuck someone who attacks you up so you can get away. If he dies as a result, oh well, he shouldn't have fucked with the wrong person I guess.

[Seth]

I made the point earlier that there would be nothing wrong with martial arts, if it was sound, sensible, balanced people who took it up. The problem is that it's always the unbalanced wankers who go mad for it.
If it was balanced people who were likely to go to this guy's seminars, the government would have no reason to ban him.
So the government obviously agrees with me.

It's therefore clearly the official UK government position, that martial arts fans are unbalanced loonies.

You don't need to take my word for it, it's official.

All this means is that your whole fucking government is loony, right along with all the inhabitants.

[Robert_S]

I made the point earlier that there would be nothing wrong with martial arts, if it was sound, sensible, balanced people who took it up. The problem is that it's always the unbalanced wankers who go mad for it.
If it was balanced people who were likely to go to this guy's seminars, the government would have no reason to ban him.
So the government obviously agrees with me.

It's therefore clearly the official UK government position, that martial arts fans are unbalanced loonies.

You don't need to take my word for it, it's official.

All this means is that your whole fucking government is loony, right along with all the inhabitants.

Seth, you can't argue with the logic in mistermack's post.