Do you consider Marksmanship a martial art?
I am an avid marksman as is my father and I have done several comps. Nothing is more satisfying than nailing a paper plate from 200 to even 800 yrds with various weapons.
I say YES.
What about you?
Update:Good Points ? and G4P!
Update 3:Wow. I never knew that Shienara... thanks. Pretty cool history.
Comments
I say yes. There are all sorts of techniques and tactics for the proper use of a firearm that most people have no clue about. Martial Arts literally means "Arts of WAR". Anybody that thinks punching somebody in the face is more martial than using proper tactics and a trained trigger squeeze is out of their mind. The vast majority of non shooters, and MANY shooters as well, would have their minds blown if they saw exactly how much depth there is to proper shooting tactics as they're practiced by higher level law enforcement like SWAT or certain military units. I'd say the reason you're getting so many "No's" is the perception of those who haven't really learned defensive shooting tactics. As far as they're concerned, shooting somebody takes no skill at all. And in a sense it doesn't. But defeating an armed thug using better armed tactics sure does, and missing is far more fatal in a firefight.
While much practice, focus, patience, mental discipline go into marksmanship it simply is not the same. It just does not have the physical exertion martial arts has.
Many things nowadays are called martial arts, modern wushu, sports fighting, exhibition martial arts, musical demos and the like. While they all have a skill and the practitioners put in a great deal of work and they are artistic without a question they simply are not martial and I do question if even those can be classified as a martial art. I think a martial art combines both the martial AND the art part. Having only one without the other does not make it martial art and there has to be a physical part to it.
Edit: @ karate 4g: Marksman definition: A marksman is a person who is skilled in precision or shooting, using projectile weapons, such as with a rifle but most commonly with a designated marksman rifle and/or a sniper rifle, to shoot at long range targets.
Archery generally does not fall under that category in modern times even though the archers in the middle ages were called marksmen in their times. Archery is considered a martial art.
I find some of these answers hilarious. Archery is a martial art, but shooting isn't? I fail to see the difference. Gun play is considered by many to be the American martial art.
Anyone who thinks marksmanship is just aiming down the sights and pulling the trigger clearly has little experience shooting. From natural point of aim, to trigger discipline, range estimation, and positional shooting, marksmanship requires physical and mental exercise to attain proficiency. Not to mention CQB, which is an extremely physically demanding form of shooting. To say shooting is easier than traditional martial arts is a gross underestimate of the skills of truly competent shooters and the years of effort they've put into attaining that level of proficiency. If you think all there is to shooting is lining up the sights and pulling the trigger, try that idea with the old timers at Camp Perry. It'll be a big eye opener.
Gun play is just a current martial art. Everything from Hsing Yi to sai forms were once martial arts used for utilitarian purposes, and shooting is no different.
At the same time I do classify them as "Combative Arts" I suppose that most Martial Arts have a more peaceable that means to them in view that they have been at first created as self security however as it at all times seems may also be changed into a sport. As these were at first created for leisure, however then became used as a means for being equipped to defend oneself. I do not bear in mind the military's training and use of Martial Arts as a Martial artwork Per Se due to it can be restricted amalgamation of various disciplines and a few the place they simply instruct ground fighting ( on account that that you may restrict it if you are skilled ample, but the practice is excellent to grasp within the occasion you do go to the bottom). It would (and i am just spitballing right here) be that most Asian Martial Arts utilize extra of the physique then these different combative disciplines, and has more potential to adopt progression, whereas these are traditionally visible as one dimensional fighting disciplines, and are extra prominently seen as physical games over the last two centuries or so. However nonetheless to be a well rounded fighter, one must always adopt any style of combating discipline to progress oneself and certainly not eschew others because of satisfaction or being a "purist" (when you consider that all of them have a useful lesson to them) due to the fact the arena is evolving and altering and as a consequence all of us must as well, no matter what we gain knowledge of whether it is wrestling, boxing, or Asian Martial Arts to be prepared for whatever could come our method. That's simply my tackle the topic
Absolutely and anyone who disagrees knows nothing about martial arts.
Martial means military and Art means applications, shooting guns or arrows both fall under that under any definition of martial arts. There are also many schools of Archery though most MA only know the Japanese Kyudo and shooting is about the same. What weapon do you use
@All
Do none of you who claim Marksmanship is not a martial art understand english? for physical exertion have ever done a triathlon have you?
Yep. Actually, the Japanese samurai considered it a martial art and by marksmanship, I don't mean just archery. As soon as the technology was available, some Samurai warlords immediately took advantage of it. One such warlord was Oda Nobunaga who was able to conquer most of Japan with the help of specially trained companies of riflemen armed with European designed rifles called Teppo or Arquebus.
edit: Arquebuses were brought to Japan during the 16th century by Portuguese merchants. Within years after that, Japanese copies were being manufactured and used in the battlefield.
No, it's not and it is nothing to the challenge of martial arts.
It's takes years and years of practise to become a world champion for example, those who fight at Lumpinee stadium have often already trained a decade and they are 18/19 years old, many peak at 25 and are specialists by that time, some of the best muay thai fighters in the world took 20 years to get to that level 20 YEARS!
It is the same in virtually all martial arts, to be truly masterful, it requires at least a decade of extreme dedication, and that may be pushing it, some would say 15 years or longer, and by this I mean training 6 days a week nearly every week for those years, if not every day of those years.
If you have a powerful rifle, say 338. or above, then 800 yards is nothing, you have to compensate a tiny amount for the drop and wind, then simply aim down the sights at the target, or slightly off it if there is a strong wind and your rifle isn't very powerful.
Martial arts are about controlling someone else's body, being able to manipulate them and strike, sweep, grapples, lock etc to get them into the state of a rag doll within 15 seconds while your guard and movement are such that they can't even hit you! Marksmanship is pi$$ easy!
@';?' Standard target shooting is pathetically easy, all you have to do is:
Aim down the sight and put weapon into a secure, shouldered position (takes a minute to learn)
Breathing and body control/posture (takes a few minutes to learn)
Accommodation for bullet drop (simply aim weapon higher, takes a few weeks to master)
Accommodation for wind (Simply move in the opposite direction of the wind, the hardest but again doesn't take long to grasp)
Rapid sharpshooting or paintballing is much more skillful as there are moving things both you and the targets, especially when those things shoot paint back at you, that's skillful, hitting a stationary target at 800 yards when you are laid down with a bipod and a big scope are so easy, all you need at most are a few practise shots....
OF COURSE YOU DISAGREE, it's called pride
It's refreshing that you respect my opinion and I too respect yours, sent a request your way man, and archery was seen as a martial art but as other have stated I see it more as a hand to hand, melee to melee thing rather than projectiles, each to his own
Personally I say no. Being a marksman required tone or practice and skill. But I wouldn't consider it martial art.
I consider the ability to shoot to be a skill.
Some have a very finely hones shooting skill, but marksmanship alone is quite a bit short of martial art. Though martial art could (some do) include shooting.
No...@gluttonforpunishement- the term martial art can be deceiving. It does mean war but the concept of martial arts are primarily unarmed/melee attacks. Going purely off of the name than you could also consider things like land navigation, explosives, and endless other things to be considered martial arts because they all involve war.