Forum:Jozu & Beckman : No Haki !

I've raised the issue many a time but I (finally) decided to make a forum :

Why are Beckman and Jozu mentioned in the list of Haki users ?

I really mean it, why ?


 * 1) Just because he might have hit Croc, that doesn't make him have Haki.


 * 1) He stopped Kizaru, then also no Haki ( Kizaru is a logia, thats no reason at all ! )

Even if they do possess Haki : It has never been mentioned at all : So if we think over this "It's pure spectaculation ! "

You might ask me : How I can explain the above events


 * Even though these answers are spectaculations, I'm just trying to explain stuff before I'm asked the above question :


 * 1) Jozu might have been too fast for Croc's Logia !


 * 1) Beckman's incident might have been due to a DF or even Seastone bullets ! ( He's intelligent and Kizaru knows it ! )


 * So here we are : Please explain why they should stay on " Confirmed" list of Haki users ?



Discussion
Pandawarrior 09:31, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Jozu: There have been multiple instances where Crocodile activated his devil fruit on reflex, so I don't think Jozu would have been able to surprise him. I've got to class in a bit otherwise I'd check but I think Crocodile actually saw Jozu's attack coming and still got hit. Also, he was able to shatter Aokiji's ice form, resulting in Aokiji bleeding from the mouth, and I think we can safely say that an Admiral will have mastered his devil fruit to activate on reflex. For me, these instances, coupled with the fact that the other high ranking division commanders, namely Marco and Vista have Haki, make it very clear that he does have haki.
 * 2) Beckman: Beckman(n?)'s case is a bit more complicated as we only have 1 scene to use as evidence and you're right, Kizaru may have stopped due to Seastone bullets or whatever. I still believe he has Haki, seeing that he is the first mate of a Yonkou and whatnot, but it is a bit speculative.
 * 1) What I mean is Jozu might have hit him so fast that it was faster than Croc's reflexes ( him turning into sand ) : Even if he does have haki, It's never been stated : So we should not add him into the Haki users list .
 * 2) U want him to be in the list or not ?


 * 1) And what about Jozus attack on Aokiji???
 * No, I don't want him in the list, but I do think he has Haki :-) Pandawarrior 12:09, March 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree with Pandawarrior: the attack on Aokiji is sufficient enough to state that Jozu has Haki without being too much speculative; and as for Beckman, there is no such proof, so he should be removed from the list. sff9 (talk) 12:15, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Please explain how Jozu's attack on Aokiji proves that he has Haki
 * As Panda said, he made Aokiji bleed whereas he was in ice form when he was hit, so the "fast reflex" argument does not really work here. I don't say it is impossible that Jozu do not have Haki, but you can't question that without questioning everything that wasn't explicitly stated! sff9 (talk) 12:34, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * The important thing in both cases is that Aokiji and Crocodile both saw it coming and thus had an oppurtunity to react, yet both were injured. Check out chapter 560 page 11 for the manga and episode 469 for the anime. Crocodile saw the attack coming and was still injured.
 * I think there's more evidence for Haki than against it. The explicitly stated argument can be used for a lot of things that we assume canon. Panda 12:44, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think there's more evidence for Haki than against it. The explicitly stated argument can be used for a lot of things that we assume canon. Panda 12:44, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion Beckman
I will just copy what I recently posted on the haki talkpage:

There is no confirmation, no. I propose to remove Beckman from the list:

a) Kizaru just acted in his typical weird, sarcastic way (obvious in the anime version).

b) Even if not, Beckman might use seastone bullets to harm logias (this isn't even far stretched, the standard guards at impeldown use seastone-net bazookas and Smoker has his famous staff)

Honestly, unlike others I don't see Haki as something super rare or special. Every vice admiral possesses some sort of haki, as well as everyone on whole freaking amazon lilly. I believe that the Shichibukai, as well as most members of Yonkou-level crews are able to use it.

But: If we say that Beckman is a user, without actually demonstrating anything, several other characters need to follow in his footsteps. Jinbe comes to mind. I all invite you to the speculation party ;)-- 13:02, March 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmm! So should I remove him ?

Discussion Jozu
Look roranoa, we don't like speculation as well (I guess). So lets gather the 4 possible, known ways to hurt a Logia, in this case 2 extremely powerful users even:

a) Seastone equipment b) Elemental superiority of another Devil Fruit c) A body of water d) Haki

13:11, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Jozu can't use seastone equipment because it would have nullified his own powers, so a) is out.
 * Jozu is diamond, I can't see a connection or superiority to sand or ice, b) is out.
 * Jozu is not able and was not seen applying a body of water to both of them, so c) is out as well.
 * Marco and Vista, the other commanders, are able to use haki. So it would be no surprise if Jozu (who is technically a "rank" higher than Vista) is able to use haki. But even if this is speculation, fact is: He was able to hurt 2 logias that can dissolve by reflex, one even on an admiral level. So, by crossing out every other known way, it must be haki.


 * All right: but do u think he must be listed in the "Confirmed Haki users" ?


 * If so needed we can just put a note under the list that Jozu might have Haki.


 * I dont actually care if he has Haki or not (he mostly does)--He is not a confirmed user :-)


 * It is confirmed because there is no other known explanation of the facts, as Jinbe illustrated. If you can come up with an explanation that seems coherent and not too far-fetched, then there'd be a reason to remove Jozu from the list; but as it is, saying his Haki is confirmed isn't unfounded. sff9 (talk) 14:22, March 29, 2011 (UTC)