Originally Posted by
runcible
A padlock carried outside of traditional contexts will most definitely attract additional attention, both CONUS and OCONUS. Screwdrivers and newspapers are fairly legal as well; but out of traditional contexts and\or in other specific contexts they will attract additional scrutiny.
My personal experience with things that legitimately shouldn't be spoken of outside of school, is that they aren't spoken of. Talking about how you shouldn't be talking about something seems gauche and foppish.
I'm surprised that you describe it as initially difficult to locate your own eyes during self-practice of the eye-gouge, but am happy for your improvement in the skill.
It just doesn't seem a good trade to occupy one or both hands (as you describe above, re: gouging) with dirty pool of questionable efficacy, while your opponent's hands roam free.
How many apples must be consumed and to what standard, in order to demonstrate sufficient proficiency with these close cannibal concepts?
It seems that if ball-kicks, eye-gouges, and cannibalism were the high-percentage of success options as presented, they'd be in service with the criminal element already. More so, as presented, it seems as if you yourself would be defenseless against them if your opponent used them against you first.
If these dozen "ways to bust a guard" haven't been thought of before, then how are they already banned? Could you list these unforgivable guard breaks, please?
The MMA world has given immensely to the combatives realm, and has swept a tremendous amount of incestuous martial garbage off of the table. While there are specific adaptations and advantages to material outside of the ring, you're not describing any of those that I'm aware of. Rather, it sounds like you're talking down to them because of their skill and training, which seems anti-intellectual and unhelpful.
With no ire, I read your comments as being those of someone whom has thought deeply on different subjects, perhaps even more deeply than most; but you have neither presented it to a skeptical audience nor to "the other side." This is something that all curricula developers need to keep themselves honest, and it is tremendously rewarding for the risk given in trade.