Having a Warrior Mindset in Modern Society

[ljgrohn]

From the 10th to the 19th the Samurai were the epitome of the warrior. They ate, slept, and breathed combat. To them it was better to die with honor than live without. With that said, the amount of time and effort they spent on training win in battle was ridicules, comparable only to a few other warrior classes in history.

There main weapon was the katana, each made for individually for one Samurai who would use this same sword for years to come, learning its in and outs. With this they would often carry the wakizashi. A short sword that would accompany them everywhere, even in the most secure of places. With these weapons they trained constantly for war.

Yet even with the amount of time spent training for open conflict on the battlefield, each Samurai felt it his personal burden in life to become proficient in as many areas of combat as possible.

Along with what we call Kendo (sword fencing) they would also practice the art of Iaido, which focused on drawing the sword, not only from standing but weak-handed and kneeling. They studied Aikido, the art of unarmed defense against multiple armed attackers. They studied Jiujutsu, or the art of grappling and joint manipulation. Along with all of this they were also the most educated warrior society the world may have ever seen.

All this is to ask, how do we measure up. Are we committed enough to our families and our own safety, to be willing to diversify our training? Now 99.5% of the people out there do not have time to devote themselves completely to the study and training of the Martial Arts (including firearms). However, are we willing to stay in shape, stay mentally prepared and sharp, learn to fight with and without weapons, and to say to the world I am a warrior, not a victim?

The question then is this: how do we achieve a Warrior mindset? These are just my thoughts, and I would love to hear you guys’ thoughts. Do you cross train? How? What is your motivation to do so? How can we help each other develop this mindset?

Looking forward to your responses to my way too long post :D,
LJ

[YVK]

From the 10th to the 19th the Samurai were the epitome of the warrior. They ate, slept, and breathed combat.

With these weapons they trained constantly for war.


All this is to ask, how do we measure up. Are we committed enough to our families and our own safety, to be willing to diversify our training?


I put in bold what I consider a key here. I do not consider myself an epitome of a warrior, nor do I eat combat. I do not train for war constantly.

I do not measure up to samurai in what they did to live, survive and provide for their families, and samurai can't hold a candle to me at what I do. I'd hazard a guess that my family and I are more secure and safe than any samurai and his offspring.

I am very committed to security and safety of my family. Being proficient with firearms/MMA/sharp objects is a small part of being truly secure in our times; at least it is my take. It is important enough that I spend time on it, and I am always looking to expand my skills, but I don't have a fixation on it. Staying fit and sharp is an entirely independent goal.
I refuse to be a victim and I won't let my family to be victimized, but to me it doesn't mean I'll have to become a man-eater - hence, I do not care to cultivate samurai mindset. Perhaps if my job involved killing people for living, I'd be of different opinion.

[LittleLebowski]

I physically cannot refer to myself as a "warrior," no matter my military background, present level of training, and mindset. To me it smacks of preening and chest thumping. All of the very tough men I truly respect do not apply such labels to themselves and practice being humble in the extreme.

I believe what drives me is security of my family and to be quite honest, financial security is probably more important nowadays than physical, at least as far as which one you should devote more time to.

I shoot and PT because I enjoy it. I do my drills because I do see a need for them but proficiency in self defense doesn't raise me above others in my eyes nor does make me feel like I have to apply a label to myself to differentiate myself from the rest of humanity.

[Jay Cunningham]

I physically cannot refer to myself as a "warrior," no matter my military background, present level of training, and mindset. To me it smacks of preening and chest thumping. All of the very tough men I truly respect do not apply such labels to themselves and practice being humble in the extreme.

I believe what drives me is security of my family and to be quite honest, financial security is probably mor important nowadays than physical, at least as far as which one you should devote more time to.

I shoot and PT because I enjoy it. I do my drills because I do see a need for them but proficiency in self defense doesn't raise me above others in my eyes nor does make me feel like I have to apply a label to myself to differentiate myself from the rest of humanity.

Great answer IMO.

[Beamish]

I physically cannot refer to myself as a "warrior," no matter my military background, present level of training, and mindset. To me it smacks of preening and chest thumping.
Warrior Says...

http://www.bustedcoverage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/the-ultimate-warrior.jpg

If you want to talk about being aware, being focused and most of all being personally responsible, I can do that. But I just chuckle and see images like the above when I run across such overtly militaristic rhetoric on the intertubes.

[David Armstrong]

The question then is this: how do we achieve a Warrior mindset? These are just my thoughts, and I would love to hear you guys’ thoughts. Do you cross train? How? What is your motivation to do so? How can we help each other develop this mindset?
I would suggest the better question is "Is such a mindset needed, or even beneficial in today's society?" I would say "no" for all but the smallest percentage of people.

[LittleLebowski]

"Personal responsibility" nails it down for me.

[ljgrohn]

Alright so I think I misrepresented my thoughts a little. I was not saying that everybody need to train 40 hours a week and always be ready. I wasn't saying that everyone should be 2% body fat (def. not me :) ) and a professional MMA to boot.

What I was saying was that the Samurai, though doing most of their fighting with sword in hand spent just as much time in other disciplines not because it was fun but because it was virtuous in their case to do so. The warrior mindset is not just about killing people for a living, it is about training to the point that you need to be trained.

Example, IMO somebody in LE should be more proficient than the accountant in unarmed combat, and much more proficient in firearms. It is part of their job and people's lives depend on it. The accountant who wishes to carry, IMO, should devote just as much time to being able to overcome a potentially dangerous situation without drawing his firearm. If he is to do this he needs martial arts training of some type. In deciding to learn self-defense he is cultivating a warrior mindset, and he is ready for what comes.

The question is I guess better phrased this way: how much training should the average person go through to become able to protect themselves and those around them? How is it different, in your guys' opinions, between military, LE, and civilians?

Last thought. I grew up in a family where everybody was in the military. I was taught that being a warrior does not mean being the biggest, maddest dude out there. It means doing the right thing for the sake of the right thing. It means protecting others at the cost of yourself, wether that means you wake up everyday and spend yourself training in the morning before work, or that means you lay your life down for your country. It is not about being strong, but being meek. Meekness means power under control. Humility is huge, but never false humility. We can say here that we don't want a them or us mentality, and that's fine. But then don't turn around and call people "sheeple" as many on these types of forums do. I think we can basically all agree to disagree :) but I wanted you all to know that this was about chest thumping or being prideful.

I hope your are well,
Lucas

[ljgrohn]

"Personal responsibility" nails it down for me.


I think I agree with this :D. But what does this entail for you?

[David]

it is about training to the point that you need to be trained.

The samurai knew who their enemy was, it was the other samurai. The armed citizen usually has no clue who the enemy is going to be until the enemy acts first.

The samurai knew the weapon and tactics their enemy was going to most likely use since they were also a samurai. I am not a killer, rapist or thug so I have no clue what the mindset is of those who are.





How is it different, in your guys' opinions, between military, LE, and civilians?

Oaths & Uniforms.





It is not about being strong, but being meek. Meekness means power under control. Humility is huge, but never false humility. We can say here that we don't want a them or us mentality, and that's fine.

I think there is a confusion between being armed and proficient with your weapon of choice and being a warrior. Two different things, not all warriors had any training at all, and not all highly skilled marksmen are warriors. Look at Audie Murphy, he hardly looked like a warrior and I doubt he received any more training than the typical service man but he seemed to do ok. I would assume he got his warrior mindset in the middle of the combat, he realized it was "him or them" and voila a warrior was born instantly on the battlefield.

[MTechnik]

Oaths & Uniforms.
obligation, legal presumption of innocence, backup


I think there is a confusion between being armed and proficient with your weapon of choice and being a warrior. Two different things, not all warriors had any training at all, and not all highly skilled marksmen are warriors. Look at Audie Murphy, he hardly looked like a warrior and I doubt he received any more training than the typical service man but he seemed to do ok. I would assume he got his warrior mindset in the middle of the combat, he realized it was "him or them" and voila a warrior was born instantly on the battlefield.

If I am walking down the street and someone looks like they are going to ask for cash, do I need to become a warrior? nope.

If someone wants to kill me, and I have to react now to save my son's life. I need to become a warrior now. It becomes a mindset of ultimate survival, and "anything goes" without losing ones' cool.

[ljgrohn]

not all warriors had any training at all, and not all highly skilled marksmen are warriors.

I totally agree with you. It is the mindset. Once again is it a negative thing for an accountant to develop a warrior mindset?

And as far as oaths and uniforms I disagree. The amount and types of training are different and that the point. The question was, what type of training should different types of people focus on. Eg., should a civilian focus more on self-defense with a weapon (lethal or non-lethal?), or on unarmed self-defense? What about a police officer?

Thanks so much for the response and you conversing on this topic.
LJ

[ljgrohn]

If someone wants to kill me, and I have to react now to save my son's life. I need to become a warrior now. It becomes a mindset of ultimate survival, and "anything goes" without losing ones' cool.

That's the thing though. If one doesn't determine how they will act before they have to, if they do not train for certain scenarios, if they do not prepare for what could happen, what will happen? If one trains to shoot paper but never role plays, how will they react to a violent attacker?

What if that person asks you for money and when you say no they come within your comfort zone and threaten your safety? Is it okay then, if you do not train to respond without your firearm, to respond with your firearm? No. These are the questions. How should we train and to what extent is training necessary in our society?

Thanks for your thoughts. I would love to hear some more,
LJ

[David]

obligation, legal presumption of innocence, backup


with the exception of backup the same obligation and legal presumption of innocence applies to a civilian.

[jslaker]

What if that person asks you for money and when you say no they come within your comfort zone and threaten your safety? Is it okay then, if you do not train to respond without your firearm, to respond with your firearm? No. These are the questions. How should we train and to what extent is training necessary in our society?

I'd posit that there is a difference between preparation and playing make believe. I don't need to play warrior to be prepared to defend myself in the same way that I don't need to imagine myself a doctor to be prepared to deal with basic first aid. I'm no samurai, but I stayed at Motel 8 last night.

[MTechnik]

with the exception of backup the same obligation and legal presumption of innocence applies to a civilian.

When the police arrive, and there is a bloody body on the ground, and a gun in my hand, I don't think I get the same presumption of innocence as a police officer in the same position. That said, I have not been in this position to say exactly how it plays out, just what I have been told.

And the obligation is not the same. if I am in a store and it gets robbed, as a citizen it is my job to keep looking at expiration dates on milk bottles, keeping my ears and eyes open. If I am walking past an alley and I hear a woman scream, my obligation is not the same. If I am at a mall and I hear shots, my obligation is not the same.

[David]

I totally agree with you. It is the mindset. Once again is it a negative thing for an accountant to develop a warrior mindset?

I can't say since I'm not sure what the warrior mindset is going to entail until I have to become the warrior.


And as far as oaths and uniforms I disagree. The amount and types of training are different and that the point. The question was, what type of training should different types of people focus on. Eg., should a civilian focus more on self-defense with a weapon (lethal or non-lethal?), or on unarmed self-defense? What about a police officer?

Their training may differ but it is the oath and uniform which obligates and distinguishes a difference. There are LEO who supplement their required training with additional training which is also open to any accountant willing to pay and work at it. There are a lot of LEO out there who took just the basic required training and re-chamber the same cartridge for 15 years. I would assume the civilian should focus on whatever training they would like to obtain and perfect. But being highly trained still does not make you a warrior, it just makes you highly trained. There is a world of difference between the two.

[YVK]

The question is I guess better phrased this way: how much training should the average person go through to become able to protect themselves and those around them?


If you're talking in a narrow context of protecting self and family from a criminal element (I am a civilian), then there is no specific amount of time. There are proficiency goals that are set by a given individual, in context of his/her baseline skills, perceived needs, and realistic ability and opportunity to pursue such goals.

I'd imagine it goes without saying that LEs and mil personnel should be better versed in various combat disciplines - I thought it was, explicit or implicit, part of their job description.

However, if you take a wide context of social stability and security, then this self-defense skill part, armed or unarmed, takes a distant place, whether you like this fact or not.
Using your accountant as an example, he first and foremost needs to have a steady job so his family, at the least, has food, hopefully, healthy food on the table. He needs to have health insurance coverage - you can be a biggest badass, and a relatively garden-variety illness will emasculate you in a day without medical attention. He needs to have some reserve funds so he and his wouldn't go under if he lost a job. Hopefully, he can afford dwelling in a good part of town - because it significantly reduces his probability of ever facing a criminal element. Hopefully, he and his have aptitude and means to live a full social life, preventing helplessness and depression - because depression kills more people than criminals do. Hopefully, he has time to exercise to be fit and healthy, etc etc. All of these things to me are more important to security and survival in modern society than even owning a firearm in a first place, let alone being "a complete self-defense" package. If, after all above is achieved, the dude has time and desire to get well-rounded - all power is to him. If, on the other hand, he decides he wants to work out before he goes to work, loses his productivity because he is tired from workouts and less sleep time, and loses the job - then he's moron who has just jeopardized his family more than he ever could.

[David]

When the police arrive, and there is a bloody body on the ground, and a gun in my hand, I don't think I get the same presumption of innocence as a police officer in the same position. That said, I have not been in this position to say exactly how it plays out, just what I have been told.

What you've been told and what law requires are at odds. ALL are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The police have their backup and dash-cams so they can instantly see what happened usually. If you had backup and a dash-cam or video showing your innocence I'd assume you'd be set free as well.


And the obligation is not the same. if I am in a store and it gets robbed, as a citizen it is my job to keep looking at expiration dates on milk bottles, keeping my ears and eyes open. If I am walking past an alley and I hear a woman scream, my obligation is not the same. If I am at a mall and I hear shots, my obligation is not the same.

The obligation of following the law is the same. You're confusing the obligation to the oath. Which was why I said "Oath & Uniform".

[MTechnik]

What you've been told and what law requires are at odds. ALL are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The police have their backup and dash-cams so they can instantly see what happened usually. If you had backup and a dash-cam or video showing your innocence I'd assume you'd be set free as well.

for a while I wanted to put a video recorder that would hold the last 15 minutes of crappy video in to a TLR-1 form factor with a light. Something that would use the gunfire to say "this video here is important, hold on to the last 10 minutes and the next 5" but...

[phil_in_cs]

The samurai knew who their enemy was, it was the other samurai. The armed citizen usually has no clue who the enemy is going to be until the enemy acts first.

The samurai knew the weapon and tactics their enemy was going to most likely use since they were also a samurai. I am not a killer, rapist or thug so I have no clue what the mindset is of those who are.


While it is true you don't share their mindset, you can learn their probable actions and patterns. That is useful information. Managing them to keep them away and avoiding violence is better than winning the conflict through violence.

[ljgrohn]

There are a lot of LEO out there who took just the basic required training and re-chamber the same cartridge for 15 years. I would assume the civilian should focus on whatever training they would like to obtain and perfect. But being highly trained still does not make you a warrior, it just makes you highly trained. There is a world of difference between the two.

I understand where you are coming from on skill sets/training vs. warrior. But if a person trains, and mentally prepares, and develops the skills of self-defense, does he not then have a different mindset than a normal person?

I come from a traditional martial arts background, and I understand that most people who go to the McDojo down the street do not ever develop a different mindset. They learn to do some flashy kicks and maybe they become more fit and self-confident. However if these same people were to go to a school with an instructor who has been there and who is not only teaching self-defense but virtues of a lifestyle, that students will be completely different. At least IMO. And I do not think those need to get into a conflict to become warriors. What do you think?

In all honesty I think the main thing we disagree on is what a "warrior mindset" is. And as for those officers, that type of mentality of doing the minimum doesn't sound very virtuous, and hopefully isn't the norm.

In Him,
LJ

[David]

I understand where you are coming from on skill sets/training vs. warrior. But if a person trains, and mentally prepares, and develops the skills of self-defense, does he not then have a different mindset than a normal person?

I honestly don't know, I would imagine it would depend on the individual? I'm not sure I'd call it a warrior mindset, to me it still seems like training and skills more than a warrior frame of mind. Someone in or freshly out of an actual war / combat zone or violent altercation will be in a different mindset regardless of their training, I guess that would be a warrior mindset but just because one person knows how to draw and shoot better than anyone else in the state it doesn't make them a warrior or in a constant frame of mind where they're ready to destroy and kill.



I come from a traditional martial arts background, and I understand that most people who go to the McDojo down the street do not ever develop a different mindset. They learn to do some flashy kicks and maybe they become more fit and self-confident. However if these same people were to go to a school with an instructor who has been there and who is not only teaching self-defense but virtues of a lifestyle, that students will be completely different. At least IMO. And I do not think those need to get into a conflict to become warriors. What do you think?


Depends on how you define warrior I guess. To me a warrior is anyone who has fought a serious fight regardless of their ability, skill or even outcome. A person who fights bravely for something and loses is still a warrior.

[Beamish]

I think I agree with this :D. But what does this entail for you?
When I wrote "personally responsible" it my intent was sum up the desire, and actions taken in support of that desire, to be responsible for your own safety and self-defense rather than simply presume someone else will "save you".

That means buying proper equipment, obtaining appropriate training and accepting the fact that this is a mature decision and not an adolescent fantasy. That is I why I avoid certain rhetoric in support of that effort.

[peterb]

Rory Miller's "Meditations on Violence" is worth a read if you're interested in training for mindset. He says that for folks not used to violence, the hardest thing is getting past the "This isn't happening to me!" freeze. It's critical to break the freeze and do something.

That's where scenario-based classes can help. There's usually more than one correct response, but you have to do something fast. Freezing gets you "killed".

I'd guess that any active sport with a degree of physical risk (make the right move or get munched) might be helpful.

Personally, my experience as volunteer firefighter/EMT has helped me get past the initial "oh s_____!" freeze when confronted with something ugly. Doing nothing is not an option. You don't always have to be the guy in front, but there's always something useful you can do.

[ljgrohn]

Rory Miller's "Meditations on Violence" is worth a read if you're interested in training for mindset.

THanks, I'm gonna have to check that out. :D

[SLG]

As an aside, the term warrior had different connotations during different times in history. At one point, being a warrior was less impressive than being a soldier. Today, being a warrior is usually considered more impressive, since "soldier" is a job title, and "warrior" is a statement that usually reflects a person's skills and mindset. A soldier may be a warrior, but not automatically, and a warrior can be anything else as well.

It's like the ridiculous term "face-shooter." It had some meaning at one point, now it's mostly lost. Next year, there will be a new cool-guy term for being a warrior.

[ToddG]

It had some meaning at one point, now it's mostly lost. Next year, there will be a new cool-guy term for being a warrior.

I vote for pistol-forum.com member. Can I get a second?

[MTechnik]

How's this for warrior mindset?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oJvMSTe7l4

[David]

And Adonis DNA?

[peterb]

No offense, but when I hear someone talk about being a “warrior” I picture the kind of guys who can’t help reminding you how lethal they are. It gets old fast.

I think taking responsibility for your family’s safety is admirable. But as other folks have noted, there are many threats other than physical violence that would be irresponsible to ignore. Every hour, every dollar spent training for combat has an opportunity cost. Is the extra hour at the gym better for your family than an hour spent reading with your kids? What happens if you get hurt when you’re training/playing? Is it really for the family, or is it all about you?

It’s hard figuring out how to allocate your resources. How do you balance preparing for something highly unlikely but potentially devastating against things that are less severe but more likely? How much is enough? It’s good to be prepared to defend your home against intruders, but if you’ve got a pallet of ammo and crappy smoke detectors you might want to rethink your priorities.

And if you truly think that violent attack is the most likely threat to your family, you might want to expend resources in moving somewhere safer.

On a more practical note, there are some concrete ideas here: http://www.corneredcat.com/Mindset/boundaries.aspx

[ubervic]

No offense, but when I hear someone talk about being a “warrior” I picture the kind of guys who can’t help reminding you how lethal they are. It gets old fast.

I think taking responsibility for your family’s safety is admirable. But as other folks have noted, there are many threats other than physical violence that would be irresponsible to ignore. Every hour, every dollar spent training for combat has an opportunity cost. Is the extra hour at the gym better for your family than an hour spent reading with your kids? What happens if you get hurt when you’re training/playing? Is it really for the family, or is it all about you?

It’s hard figuring out how to allocate your resources. How do you balance preparing for something highly unlikely but potentially devastating against things that are less severe but more likely? How much is enough? It’s good to be prepared to defend your home against intruders, but if you’ve got a pallet of ammo and crappy smoke detectors you might want to rethink your priorities.

And if you truly think that violent attack is the most likely threat to your family, you might want to expend resources in moving somewhere safer.

On a more practical note, there are some concrete ideas here: http://www.corneredcat.com/Mindset/boundaries.aspx

Excellent questions and suppositions.

When I was young and single, the notion of being a 'warrior' was very different for me than it is today, now that I've become a husband and father, not to mention a suburban Harry Homeowner.

In all honesty, the idea of taking down another human being absolutely makes me want to puke-----and the only thing worse would be seeing my wife or one of my beautiful kids being taken down when I could potentially stop it. This is the reason that I acquired my CHP and it's the reason why I study and train, when I can (when I'm not teaching/guiding/loving/enjoying my family), on how to use the tool that I carry at 4:30 position with optimum safety and efficiency.

I train so that I may utilize this tool with confidence and accuracy if/when necessary; I also hope that I will never actually have to use it. That's my idea of today's warrior.

[BWT]

I think the truth is, most of us don't want to hurt anybody, I don't particularly enjoy it.

I've played Football (Pure Warrior in the Defense line, I'm kidding, incase the humor doesn't translate), etc, etc.

Where you needed to overcome an adversary, now, that was a sport, a hobby, yeah people got hurt and yeah I hurt some of them.

The truth is there was a belief system, lifestyle, social class, and profession in being a Samurai.

It was kind of like being nobility, they didn't have 9 to 5 jobs, their job was being a Samurai. Their Social Status in life (and there was a class system, I think it might be hard to fully understand that or appreciate it as much as they did, but it was a Noble position, there were farmers that worked in the fields, etc, and there were Samurai that protected them, much like knights, etc, they lived in the service of a Lord, etc.)

They were pretty much Soldiers/Policeman/Knights/Nobles/Private Military Contractors.

You know what caused the revolution (that the U.S. had no involvement in, in reality, that the movie "The Last Samurai") in Japan amongst the Samurai? When they tried to take that title/authority from them.

Truth be told, I thought really, really hard about what I was willing to do to protect my family, my self and society, and the truth is, I want to do everything I can. I made that decision before I got my CWP.

I've had that discussion with everyone I've ever talked to about buying a firearm for self-defense, when they say something like "Oh I want one, but I don't want to keep it loaded, you know, just in case someone breaks in, etc, I don't feel it's safe" or something like "I'll shoot to wound." I've explained to them that they need to be prepared for the worst if they're going to use a firearm or really any tool/weapon for self-defense.

I'm a Computer Repair guy for a living, and I feel it's necessary to say that before I say this, I don't think you should get your CWP or buy a firearm for self-defense (Self-defense, not recreation, hunting, collection, whatever, two different things), if you don't think you're okay with taking a life when other lives, maybe your own, are at stake.

That's really it. I think the "warrior mindset" boils down to two things, the willingness to take action, doing what's necessary when the time comes, and the extreme desire to not be a victim. The rest boils down to competency with said weapons system, an individual needs to come to terms with that possibility and make a decision before they end up in that circumstance what they will do. I think that's a necessity, because honestly, if not, I think they'll probably do more harm than good.

The reason I would not consider myself a Warrior is, frankly,


a person engaged in, experienced in, or devoted to war

I hope I haul around 2-3 lbs of lead, steel, copper and polymer for years and never use it.

I think I'd classify guys who use weapons for a living could classify themselves as Warriors.

But we also aren't as fixated on honor, glory, etc, such that, if we disgraced ourselves we committed suicide to preserve the honor of our family. ETA: (I forgot to finish that thought, I think most of the guys who qualify, are pretty humble about it, and don't care to distinguish themselves with that title, I might be mistaken, but that's what I've observed).

We're a bit more humble of a society. For instance, you could be killed for disrespecting a Samurai if you weren't another Samurai, etc, and even then, they might fight to the death.

I mean how many guys carry short swords for when they don't make the Expert category for the FAST drill to preserve their family honor?

ETA: I also thought about it last night as I lay trying to fall asleep, there is a heavy religious/spiritual aspect to being a Samurai as well. It was much more than just a job.

I'm not the kind that knows that much about their culture either, I'd really consider myself an absolute novice, but that's what I do know.