Dubstepforum.com

borrowed wrote:

magma wrote:There's quite a clear line for me between organised fighting in rings/gyms and random fights in public. This was clearly pretty unpleasant and undesireable behaviour from both blokes who need to get their anger sorted out in other places - perhaps rings and gyms!

Well, you'll be happy to know they're having a Strikeforce sponsored event complete with medical staff and refs, in which these two men will fight again.

To be honest though, if you move away from someone on the bus and then they follow you to give you a slap; they deserve to get beaten down. Kid thought that an old man was an easy touch and tried to push it as far as he could.... a sensible boy wouldn't be doing it again; lesson learned.

Agreed. Fights exist to clear up such indifferences.

fights dont exist to clear up indifferences, resorting to violence to settle an arguement shows lack of intelligence and generally speaking, a dickhead

gwa wrote:i don't personally see how that could make you feel good (i'm not having a go at you)

i'd rather be much more intelligent than be as strong as possible. i would understand if it was a matter of being fit, but if you find yourself content knowing that you better than your opp. because you are stronger is a bit bizarre and something i'll never grasp

there is better ways to compete with other men, no way can you say that it's the best way.

Thats the thing, I'm not very strong for my weight class. When I win its by thinking. If you think fighting has anything to do with brute force, you've never learned much about it. This is not meant as an insult, but it is merely how people in the public see martial arts. I read every day, go to college, and work on the side. I don't see why being able to fight and being intelligent have to mutually exclusive.

It might not be the safest way, or the most pleasant way, but it is the way we've known longer than any other.

gwa wrote:

borrowed wrote:

magma wrote:There's quite a clear line for me between organised fighting in rings/gyms and random fights in public. This was clearly pretty unpleasant and undesireable behaviour from both blokes who need to get their anger sorted out in other places - perhaps rings and gyms!

Well, you'll be happy to know they're having a Strikeforce sponsored event complete with medical staff and refs, in which these two men will fight again.

To be honest though, if you move away from someone on the bus and then they follow you to give you a slap; they deserve to get beaten down. Kid thought that an old man was an easy touch and tried to push it as far as he could.... a sensible boy wouldn't be doing it again; lesson learned.

Agreed. Fights exist to clear up such indifferences.

fights dont exist to clear up indifferences, resorting to violence to settle an arguement shows lack of intelligence and generally speaking, a dickhead

I'm not quite sure when this became a personal attack. See what you're doing? You're going on the offensive, trying to make a jab at me. Its the same principle you're arguing against. Why can't we have civil discouse? Why do you have to be as you are, instead of being rational and debating the issue?

Conic wrote:

hackman wrote:
bull

You need to get out ur house more mate

how you figure that

lol where did you get a 'personal' attack from, thats my opinion on fighting and for the record i'm not questioning your intelligence

borrowed wrote:

hackman wrote:

Conic wrote:

hackman wrote:how much more desensitised to violence can we get?

Alot more sensitive to violence now than ever. It would be normal for people to see a mans head chopped off and stuck on a pole for everyone to see 2000 years ago, along with alot worse things than that. Not once since then has it been better than it is now.

bull

The man makes a point.

Hell, up until the 1920s, men boxed barehanded and executions were publicized. Since the rise of suburbia in the last fifty years, people have gotten more and more uptight on violence. Real life violence has fallen drastically, and entertainment violence has gone up.

what the fuck are you talking about?
knife crime in UK through the roof, gun crime in america, its been getting worse and worse, most likely as a direct result of the increase in entertainment violence on tv as you say

borrowed wrote:I don't see why being able to fight and being intelligent have to mutually exclusive.

Indeed... Boxing isn't called "The Sweet Science" ironically. I'm the least fighty person you're likely to meet... in fact, I think I've only ever swung a punch in genuine anger once in my life (and a LONG time ago!)... but being able to think tactically and intelligently whilst someone's punching you in the face is a constant source of wonder for me.

Fighting is a last resort... and that's what it looked like it was here... kid pushed him harder and harder, he tried to talk his way out of the confrontation, he even moved away to diffuse it, but the kid followed and insisted on making it physical...

I'm not sure an "official" fight will do much more than indulge people's bloodlust though... it's not like they're proper competitors or anything, I doubt it'd make a very good exhibition?! Both of them are just seeing dollar and fame signs now, I expect...

borrowed wrote:there is no better way to test competition between two people than a fight. I do it because I enjoy seeing who I can top, who I can beat, and what I'm made of. Its simple, really.

thats why the world is still a bit of a shitty place - people with opinions like this make it that way. wake up. we are 2010 now. fighting and violence is something from 10 000 b.c.
i did fight for fun with my friends back in the day, we did it each saturday for a year or so and i got some limbs broken - it was fun. FUN and thats it. fighting and all that comes down a war routine is the most stupid and primitive way of proving things. man survived because of his brain size and not because of his muscles. its simple - you said it yourself and its probably as simple as your brain is. i fucking hate people that believe they can ever touch another person without the permission of doing so - these kind of living beings should dissapear due to natural selection

hackman wrote: what the fuck are you talking about?
knife crime in UK through the roof, gun crime in america, its been getting worse and worse, most likely as a direct result of the increase in entertainment violence on tv as you say

Yeah either that or a growing level of poverty in the US and a grossly mismanaged firearm controls system coupled with a huge gap between the lower, middle, and upper classes caused that. But hey, if you can prove that violent video games cause real-life violence, I'll be the first person holding a picket sign in your personal protest.

Hint: You can't. A man named Jack Thompson has been trying to prove your argument for the last fifteen years, and has failed miserably. Give his name a Google if you've got time to kill.

Damn forum likes to make me doublepost.

morro_e wrote:

borrowed wrote:there is no better way to test competition between two people than a fight. I do it because I enjoy seeing who I can top, who I can beat, and what I'm made of. Its simple, really.

thats why the world is still a bit of a shitty place - people with opinions like this make it that way. wake up. we are 2010 now. fighting and violence is something from 10 000 b.c.
i did fight for fun with my friends back in the day, we did it each saturday for a year or so and i got some limbs broken - it was fun. FUN and thats it. fighting and all that comes down a war routine is the most stupid and primitive way of proving things. man survived because of his brain size and not because of his muscles. its simple - you said it yourself and its probably as simple as your brain is. i fucking hate people that believe they can ever touch another person without the permission of doing so - these kind of living beings should dissapear due to natural selection

You can call me stupid and primitive once you get a proper grasp on the English language.

:]

borrowed wrote:there is no better way to test competition between two people than a fight.

tickling contest?

Oh and, if anyone's wondering, the good folks at Harvard did a study on violent video games and found that....
Violent video games OK for kids!
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9942041-1.html

don't tell me your stupid enough to believe that

hackman wrote:don't tell me your stupid enough to believe that

What? Believe Harvard? You're right, the top university on the god damned planet's top researchers are no one to trust. I'm sure you know better.

Ignorance

oh man

.