My reasearch shows that beginning in 1470 the Sho Dynasty in Japan began to form a Imperial Government & they put a ban on the private ownership of all weapons. The Shoguns was a military type force, used to enforce this ban. It was at this time, that people began to adapt everyday tools, for use as a weapon, and began to train in their use. This seems to be the beginning of martial arts as we know it today.
When the Philippines was under Spanish Rule, Martial Arts weapons were banned there. But around 100 years ago, in 1897, when they were liberated from the Spanish, then the ban on the Martial Arts was lifted. One of the things that emerged at that time, was the Balisong Knife. The Area of Batangas, soon became the place where they made these knives. Just like there are knife making centers in Sheffield England, Solingen,Germans and so on.
While most people in the Philippines, would consider the Balisong to be a "tourist" item, and very few martial arts quality Balisongs are made. Still, I don't see how it can be excluded from being a Martial Arts weapons.
I would like to see every sword beat into a plow shear. I am no fan of weapons. But, the constitution does provide for a free militia, where men are trained in the use of weapons. While this is to be done under the control or supervision of the Government, I do not see any indication that the martial arts is not fully endorsed by the government. In fact, I don't see how it could be more endorsed.
Many Schools have martial arts clubs. Most WMCA's have classes in this art. Many collages offer martial arts as a form of physical education for exercise. Many policeman train in the martial arts. There are congressman, senators, and judges that have studied it at least briefly. Perhaps to some degree, everyone has studied it a little bit. Most training in hand to hand combat & most knowledge as we know it today, is found in the martial arts somewhere.
Am I for weapons? Nope, but I don't deny the facts as they are, just because I do not believe in the use of weapons. Also, the issue of what to do, when a person commited the act of treason by using his weapon on his fellow citizen. The founding father made provision for dealing with people like this. One provision they did not make, was to take tools and weapons away from everyone, because of the action of a very few people, who would use their weapon against a fellow citizen, rather than a common enemy. Thanks, JohnR7
When the Philippines was under Spanish Rule, Martial Arts weapons were banned there. But around 100 years ago, in 1897, when they were liberated from the Spanish, then the ban on the Martial Arts was lifted. One of the things that emerged at that time, was the Balisong Knife. The Area of Batangas, soon became the place where they made these knives. Just like there are knife making centers in Sheffield England, Solingen,Germans and so on.
While most people in the Philippines, would consider the Balisong to be a "tourist" item, and very few martial arts quality Balisongs are made. Still, I don't see how it can be excluded from being a Martial Arts weapons.
I would like to see every sword beat into a plow shear. I am no fan of weapons. But, the constitution does provide for a free militia, where men are trained in the use of weapons. While this is to be done under the control or supervision of the Government, I do not see any indication that the martial arts is not fully endorsed by the government. In fact, I don't see how it could be more endorsed.
Many Schools have martial arts clubs. Most WMCA's have classes in this art. Many collages offer martial arts as a form of physical education for exercise. Many policeman train in the martial arts. There are congressman, senators, and judges that have studied it at least briefly. Perhaps to some degree, everyone has studied it a little bit. Most training in hand to hand combat & most knowledge as we know it today, is found in the martial arts somewhere.
Am I for weapons? Nope, but I don't deny the facts as they are, just because I do not believe in the use of weapons. Also, the issue of what to do, when a person commited the act of treason by using his weapon on his fellow citizen. The founding father made provision for dealing with people like this. One provision they did not make, was to take tools and weapons away from everyone, because of the action of a very few people, who would use their weapon against a fellow citizen, rather than a common enemy. Thanks, JohnR7