Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2010 1:11:54 GMT
A spirited discussion on Sword Buyers Guide forum on whether swords or long knives like bayonets are still practical in todays world. Would a sword be useful during a home defense? Would swords still be useful during tours in Iraq or Afghanistan? Are there situations where its better to have a sword than a gun? I would argue yes to all of the above - within their specified situations (given the choice between a HC L6 katana and a FN SCAR, I'll go with the SCAR). So, to give this debate a little context. Here's a real-world situation where a bayonet came in very useful for a soldier. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8252974.stmMilitary cross for bayonet charge Lt Adamson said the incident was "pretty terrifying" A British army officer who, after running out of ammunition, used his bayonet to charge a Taliban fighter has been awarded the Military Cross. Lt James Adamson, who is 24 and serves with the Royal Regiment of Scotland, was given the medal for his "supreme physical courage". His actions while on tour in Afghanistan saved the lives of soldiers in his platoon. He said he ran out of ammunition after killing one man, so charged the second. Lt Adamson, who is from the Isle of Man, and part of the 5th Battalion, Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, said: "To be honest it was pretty terrifying. "I think more so after the event - as it was going on there was fractions of a second between the first guy and the second guy. The Military Cross is awarded in recognition of exemplary gallantry "By the time I realised the danger was there, it was already gone. "It was the kind of the two or three minutes after that, where myself and Corporal Hamilton were still on our own - just waiting for the reserve section to echelon through and pick us up - that we were pretty convinced that if there were two there, there could have been more. "So we were there waiting for the rest to turn up and I think that was probably the longest two minutes of my life." The citation for Lt Adamson's award - as detailed on the MoD website - reads: "Adamson' supreme physical courage, combined with the calm leadership he continued to display after a very close encounter with the Taliban, were of the very highest order. "His actions also neutralised an enemy flanking attack which could have resulted in casualties for his platoon."
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Oct 24, 2010 1:24:43 GMT
Responding to this post: viewtopic.php?p=8430#p8430Larry, Concerning your answer using IPSC as an example. You are talking about people shooting competitively at 25 meters (82 feet) at tiny targets. This is not to mention that two shot are placed at two different targets, placing far apart. The shooter have bring the pistol up to eye level in order acquire one target, aim, fire then move to the next target, reacquire the new target, aim, and then fire again. All your examples are small targets at longer range. Reacquiring the same target at 25 meters alone would take at least half a second if not more. At 25 meters, even a slight recoil would move your sight picture making the target disappear. You need to reacquire the target and re-aim. I was refering to 5 feet and at a large human torso. Five feet is literally 3 steps away. Anyone with basic pistol markmaship can shoot real fast at 5 feet. You don't need to aim at that distance. Unlike IPSC, you don't have to bring your pistol all the way up to your eyes to take aim. You bring your pistol up half way point, tug it close to your right side, turn it sideway with your palm facing up, point at the general direction and pull your trigger as fast as it is possible. Nobody I know of, even beginner, ever the miss a target that large that close. It is part of Black Water pistol training program. In one of your exampe, a very good markman fire 8 aimed shots in 1 second. Which mean he can fire 16 aimed shots in 2 second. Why is this difficult to accept that anyone who does not have to aim can fire 10-13 shots in the same amount of time. Now when I was receiving the training from Black Water, I did not time myself. But because I did not have to aim and did not have to move my pistol very far from the holster, I emptied my magazine in no-time (all 13 rounds). The distance was exactly 5 feet. Even if my estimate of the time is wrong and it is 3 seconds instead of 2 seconds. I doubt it make a difference in a fight against a swordman. 13 rounds in 3 second still means 4 rounds a second. Different guns cycles and reset differently. I was using a SIG P229 during the course. My primary pistol is a Glock 23. It cycles and resets even faster than the SIG. Your response is an attempt to win an argument that you know cannot win. At 25 meters (82 feet), regardless of how slow my aim is, there is no way a swordman can get to me before I kill him. Even if I miss 2 out of 3 shot, I still get him before he can reach me. At 5 feets, I don't need to aim. In both cases, I win.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 1:50:19 GMT
Hallmar, I think you should also specify one other situation where a knife/long knife/sword could be better than a gun: civilian life. Not all of us are soldiers and home invasion, with proper preparation, has little risk.
With that said, I think in a home defense situation, a long knife or short sword would be a good back-up to a shotgun due to the intimidation factor of a shotgun. However, local laws may contravene this, so a long knife or perhaps a crossbow would be possible options. Alternatively, there's the layout of the house to consider. For instance, my apartment has no hallways; it's essentially three large rooms that are basically only separated by walls and a door. There's also the layout of the furniture, which could get in the way, but also act as a potential barrier between you and an invader, making a ranged weapon of sorts pretty important. However, if you have a home with long hallways or nooks and crannies where a person could hide, then a gun may not be an good weapon as the draw on it would be too much if you were surprised and, so long as they avoid the barrel, an attacker can pretty much grab it with impunity, something that can't be done with a blade.
In a combat situation, again, it would primarily be a backup weapon given the near universal use of firearms of all sorts, but it would still be practical so long as you were willing to lug it around. With that in mind, again, a short, light sword, such as the Hanwei Tactical Wakizashi, or a long knife such as a bowie, kukri, or any of the numerous Filipino short swords/long knives would be ideal. It would give be lightweight, allowing for the rest of your gear, but still give you a large enough weapon to be effective from a greater distance than the extremely up close and personal range of a knife; in fact, I believe both Gurkha regiments and Filipino soldiers are still instructed in the use of their large knives/short swords. They would also give you greater range and versatility than a modern bayonet (which, I believe, is little more than a KA-BAR with a bayonet lug on it) which limits you to stabbing, again making it fairly easy to avoid as the opponent can still grab the whole weapon with relative impunity.
In a civilian defense situation, I think a sword, if legal, would serve mostly as a deterrent, as many criminals who are not set on killing someone will not harm you if you have so much as an umbrella in hand (or a heavy looking purse, ladies). Same goes for a large knife, though not as much, as it has the mobility to still be practical. I think I've said this several times, on here and elsewhere, but a person's comfort zone will vary from person to person, though I think the average is 3-5 feet away, so a little more than arm's reach. Unless there is a weapon visible in someone's hand as they come towards you (and often, it won't be), you wouldn't think to draw a weapon until they breach that comfort zone, meaning they are within arm's reach and likely have a weapon. Even assuming a mass amount of training with firearms, it will still take time to draw, aim, and fire, during which time the assailant could have stabbed you several times; you also need to be able to bring your arm up to shoulder height so that you can effectively target a vital area, unless your aim is to distract so you can flee, in which case, shooting them in the foot would probably work (I'm kidding here, so don't take my word for it). Conversely, if you're trained with a knife as well as in some form of unarmed combat (such as Arnis/Kali/Escrima/FMA in general), you would be able to divert their weapon hand whilst drawing your own knife (or just punching them in the face if you don't want to use lethal force) so that you could wound or kill.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 2:11:10 GMT
Student, I feel the need to tell you to back it off a bit; it sounds like you're personally attacking Larry in your post by calling him dishonest.
And, in response to your remark about not needing to aim at 5 feet, how much do you know of human anatomy? I don't have a medical degree, but I know a fair amount; aiming solely at the torso, you would be hoping to hit the heart, lungs, liver, or abdominal aorta. The heart, lungs, and liver are all protected by the rib cage to an extent, however, you would still have to aim above mid-torso to hit any of them. Conversely, the abdominal aorta is near the waist and the center of balance, but it wraps around the spine before splitting in two like an inverse Y. That, however, you could only hit with either a miraculously lucky shot or threading-a-needle-at-50mph precision. As an example, rapper 50 Cent was shot nine times, though only once in the chest, yet he still lives; granted, those were with 9mm rounds, but those are most common, yet his shooter apparently didn't aim either since one of the bullets hit him in the hand, one in the left cheek, hip, arm, and both legs. Now, in regards to your remarks in the other topic about .40 and .45, what you seem to mainly be hoping for with those is the blunt force trauma associated with a gunshot, yet, in tense situations, men have kept walking despite being shot; this can also be replicated through drugs like PCP. To be frank, it seems that the spray and pray tactic is just that: spray some rounds and hope you hit something. Aiming, particularly in close, would be vital, since, if you miss, you would be open to a counterattack.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2010 2:22:05 GMT
Unless you're fighting the blind and/or deaf, this is the logical conclusion... :lol:
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Oct 24, 2010 2:35:54 GMT
When I was shooting with Black Water, I remember that my shots were scattered a bit in the 5 feet event. However, none of them missed the torso. None. Nobody else missed either. And many of the shooters were very inexperienced. I have no doubt many shot would have been missed if the distance were farther. The majority of the shots were 3-5 inches of the soloflex. My estimate is that by the second shot, the game is over. Even if the shots hit the abdominal, it would have been over. No one I know of continue walking after getting shot in the stomach. Abdominal wounds are never fatal if treated in timely manner. However, the pain is unbearable. In all case, the person collapsed immediately. When I was a kid, I witnessed a person stabed by a small spike, very small. The person collapsed immediately. He survived the wound. If you have been punch in the stomach, you would understand. Immagine a hollow point .40 punching through your stomach. As it enters, it mushroomes tearing apart any mussle, tissues, organs along it path. The mushroom would be more than 1 inches. If you have a sword, you would drop it clutching your stomach.
|
|
|
Post by Larry Jordan on Oct 24, 2010 3:11:27 GMT
At five feet, he can foul your draw and cut your head off. You lose.
The scenario I had in mind was not some swordsman with a death wish starting his attack at 25 yards. Are you familiar with the 21-foot rule? Someone wielding a knife within this perimieter against a handgun armed defender should be considered a lethal threat. If a knife-wielding assailant starts his charge at 21-feet (7 yards), the handgun armed victim must (1) recognized the threat, (2) determine a course of action, (3) draw and (4) fire. This is going to take precious seconds. (One second can be the difference between life and death.)
In a Street Survival II course I took 12 years ago through James Jarrett's American Shooting Academy, we had an opportunity to test our skills in such a scenario. We had the added advantage of knowing that an attack was coming. At the beep we drew and fired into a silhouette target in front while the attacker sprinted toward the intended victim/shooter (shielded by a training assistant to prevent the shooter from turning toward the attacker). No shooter was able to get more than one round on target before being tagged/knifed. One hurried hit on target may not be enough to stop the threat. And the students in the class were not typical. They were some very skilled defensive shooters, having taken many of courses offered by this and other training facilities here in the Phoenix area.
I want to survive the encounter, not just "win." Other skills must come into play to address close targets. Drawing one's handgun may not be the most survivable choice. One may have to resort to other skills to parry the attack and then reposte.
Do what you think best. It will be your gun fight.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 3:17:53 GMT
The force and pain a person feels from a blow to the stomach varies like with comfort zones. I played soccer when I was young, specifically as a goalie, and got hit in the stomach hundreds of times protecting the nets; when I got older and quit soccer (due to a move that resulted in depression), I got into a bunch of fights with kids. They were schoolyard scrapes and not true fights, but I still got hit more times than I can remember. As a teen, I didn't get hit so often, but whenever a friend and I sparred, I took blows from his bokuto full force to the stomach when I couldn't block fast enough. Point is, I'm used to getting hit in the stomach, so it rarely phases me anymore. Anyone who fights regularly can take a punch to the stomach and barely feel it; in fact, in traditional Muay Thai, they regularly perform Thai Crunches, wherein you perform a regular crunch, but when you complete it, a partner punches you in the stomach to toughen you up.
As for a .40, I couldn't really imagine that, since I have no experience with .40s, but can you imagine the feeling of a 5.56 tracer round burning a hole through your left oblique again and again and again? It feels like your insides are liquefying after being hit with a freight train. On the other hand, once it hits you and expends its energy, that's it; no more pain other than what you're already experiencing. Conversely, have you ever felt a blade scraping between your bones as it's being shoved into your body, knowing its wielder could, at any time, twist it and yank it and jerk it and all manner of vicious things? Being stabbed is bad enough; it's like being shot, but there's a feeling of invasiveness and utter wrongness and every movement, every breath jars the knife still in your body, sending rippling torrents of pain screaming through your body.
Anyways, the point I'm trying to get across is that being punched or shot in the stomach does not equal unbearable pain that will drop anyone, especially if they're either used to it or too jumped up to feel anything; both human will and drugs greatly factor into pain management and being able to stay up after being shot, unless it's to a vital area.
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Oct 24, 2010 4:29:09 GMT
@larry: How does your scenario improve if you have no gun but having a knife instead? With a knife, your chance is exactly 50/50. If your skill is superior than your opponent, you may win (I say "may" because luck is a factor). If your skill is inferior to your opponent, you loose. With the gun, your chance is far better, regardless of your skill or your opponent skill. You are actually worse off with a knife, you still have to draw your knife. But you cannot use it until your opponent reach you. By the time he reaches you, the probability for mutual death is very high. His momentum will carry him forward and stab you anyway. Of course, you can evade and get out of his way, which requires martial arts skill. But you could easily do it with the gun in your hand as with the knife in your hand. If you say that one MUST have a gun AND train in martial arts, empty hand and weapons; I am in agreement. But the gun is the primary weapon. All your scenarior prove is that being surprised put a person in disadvantageous position. No great revelation there. It is true regardless of weapons you carry. But being surprised having a gun is still far better than being surprised and having no gun. I serious doubt that any law enforcement officer will give up his guns for a knife or a sword. Furthermore, your scenario is specific to cops. They cannot shoot until the assailant charge. As a civilian, I will shoot if a person threaten me with a knife. I am not there to arrest him; I am not responsible of enforcing the law; I just want to live. I probably would have shot the guy long before the 21 feet. So the whole scenario does not apply to anyone but cop. Another thing that puzzle me about your scenario is that a cop gun is not already drawn. If someone has a unsheath knife, I would have already drawn my gun, point it at him, with the finger resting on the trigger. What is the point of leaving the gun in the holster? vincent: A strong abdominal muscle will block a strike to the stomach, hence protecting the impact on internal organs. That is why person with strong abdominal muscle feel no pain. It has nothing to do with pain tolerance, there is an absense of pain. Bullets are different matter. It will punch through the muscle tearing at internal organs. A 5.56mm tracer round is a poor anti-personnel round. A regular 5.56mm is better. Because tracer round will cauterize the wound and burn the nerve. No nerve, no pain. Furthermore, the Geneva Convention only allow regular full metal jacket round. I use hollow points (which not allow for the military) rounds. As it enter it will mushroom to larger size causing far more damage to organs and tissues. PS: At 5 feet, you are still out side a swordman reach. He has to take two, maybe three, steps before he can cut you down (depend on sword length and how tall your opponent is). You can always step back and shoot him. Remember, if his sword is still sheathed, he still have to draw it. If his sword is drawn, why would you wait until he is 5 feet from you to shoot him down? I would shoot him long before the 5 feet distance. It is justified self-defense if someone is approaching threateningly with a sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2010 6:02:13 GMT
Am I to assume that the attacker already had a knife unsheathed? If so, then it would be fair to assume that the defender should have their pistol or revolver in hand too. I'm not going to think quietly to myself, "I wonder why that nice gentleman over there has a knife in his hands..." without reacting. Granted, I can discretely take my Butterfly knife out of my pocket while walking down the street and no one will know until I whip it out - maybe not even then. Also, if the sidearm is too well concealed, it becomes difficult to clear your gun from your holster (or fanny pack, hehe) quickly enough to counter a stab.
However, the same criticism for locating points of damage also apply to a knife. A knife is lethal, but it must be at least 5 - 6 inches in length to be used as an effective defensive weapon. Usually, you want to aim for throat with a downward slash or stab (rib cage requires aiming with the edge parallel). Cleanly cutting someone's throat isn't going to be easy especially if they see you coming (if you have one of those rubber practice knives try a few times the next time you're in MA class). If I am packing, I want my sidearm to be easily accessible to the point that I could parry with my left and quick draw with my right - or evade and draw. Regardless, if you're in the triangle stance, you should be able to parry with your left forearm (taking a minor to intermediate cut) while squeezing off 1 to 2 rounds. Even if you have a pea shooter like the S&W Bodyguard or Ruger LCP, at point blank range, a .380 will still stun an attacker long enough to finish emptying the magazine. By the time you empty your mag, your attacker will have lost enough blood or sustained enough blunt trauma to their vital organs, that they are effectively neutralized.
I also carry a Buck hunting knife sometimes too (easier to explain if asked by a local yokel). Would my knife work too? Yeah, of course. I'd probably be able to draw and stab in about about a 1/4 second difference to drawing and firing my Colt. However....the knockdown power of a .357 is just apples to oranges when compared to a slash to the throat. There's always going to be the chance that I didn't cut deep enough, and I'll end up in the morgue along with my attacker. If I put a .357 hollow point to your torso - even if it's a little off center - you're immediately going to feel that impact and the physics of it are undeniable, 100% of the time. If my gun jams or I run out of ammo, then I'll go with my knife, and that's why I always have a knife - even when I'm packing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2010 6:05:29 GMT
D'oh...I was too slow. :x
Note: I emailed my wife who's at work right now for clarification on dept rules for when to unholster their sidearms.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 6:55:05 GMT
I'd honestly like to see you try and prove in court that you felt justifiably threatened by a knife at 21 feet. Unless the guy is a Spetnaz operative preparing to do a backflip, there is no possible way you could feel threatened at 21 feet. I.E., your case would be rule as murder and you would be going to jail.
Poor anti-personnel round? Burn the nerve. No nerve, no pain? Where are you getting this? Depending on the brightness of the round, the temperature varies, but assuming it is a bright round, it usually is loaded with magnesium. Magnesium burns at... 3100C (5610F). Have you ever burned yourself on a pan straight from the oven at say... 450F? It hurts like a mo'fo and it seems to go on and on and on until you can finally release it. Multiply that by 12.5 and you'll get a magnesium burn; it will be so hot that it will feel like the coldest ice, as though you just had a piece of the arctic shelf lodged in your body. Then it will burn like the fires of hell and all you will be able to feel is liquid heat coursing through your veins and all you will be able to smell is burning flesh. It won't bleed much because of the cauterization, true, but that does not, in any sense of the word, mean it will not hurt. Maybe that's why the Geneva Convention only allows FMJ rounds? And, as a matter of curiosity, where is it written that the Geneva Convention bans the use of tracer rounds, because, as far as I know, they're in regular use over in Afghanistan and Iraq.
You don't know what a lunge is, do you? It's technically specific to fencing, but it could be applied in any situation. It is essentially a leaping step designed to cover those two, maybe three, steps between you and him. During the lunge, it is easy to draw a sword and cut someone down. I have never formally trained in any style of sword art, yet I can do it. As for shooting him before the 5 foot mark, again, that would be seen as cold blooded murder even if he was approaching you threateningly. The court would see it like this: you had a gun, he had a sword, he may have been approaching you threateningly, but he was not actually a threat when you shot him. Not a threat = not self-defense.
EDIT: As an aside to all who read my post, I apologize in advance if I came off a bit... Well, I can't really think of a proper term, but let's just go with a 'not-so-nice.'
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Oct 24, 2010 7:06:09 GMT
Vincent,
I was refering to hollow point round. It is banned by the Geneva Convention for being inhumane. I have not seen medical evidence that tracer round is more effective than regular FMJ round. If it has been effective, we would have all carried nothing but tracer in Iraq or Afghanistan. Only 1 out of 5 rounds were tracer. I usually loaded my tracers at the bottom of my magazine so that I would know when I start running low on ammo, other than that I don't see much use for tracers. The name tracer as the name is descriptive in what it intent to do, to trace. I only spent 7 years in the Army and would not consider myself an expert. But I have asked military experts and according to their opinions, I have to disagree with you.
As far as shooting at distance further away, I could easily prove the case by bringing a fencing instructor (or any good swordman of either eastern or western tradition) as an expert witness. He will demonstrated a lunge (or any other appropriated moves) to the juries. A person who is approaching you threateningly with sword is threat to life-and-limb and is justified as self-defense. I am surprised you don't see it that way.
I have practiced bayonet charge and consider anyone running at me with a sharp object a dangerous threat. I won't wait for him to be within 5 feet, or 21 feet for that matter. If he starts to move toward me at good speed, I will shoot, regardless of distance. Again, I am surprised you don't see it as a threat.
EDIT: Sure, I would give him a verbal warning at a certain distance depending on other factors. But suffice to say that the warning distance is much further than 21 feet, if he continue to ignore my verbal warning. Well, to bad for him. It is very simple -- his life or my life.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 7:25:33 GMT
Then I recommend preparing for a nasty encounter with the law should you ever actually shoot someone in those circumstances. I doubt they will see it the same way. A lunge is good for closing about 3-4 feet, perhaps more if you have strong legs and/or a running start; demonstrating as much would probably hurt your case more than help it as it would prove that even with a lunge, the swordsman was still no danger to you when you shot him at 21 feet. If a man with a knife started running at you from 40 feet away (I can't imagine why he would), it would be the same as shooting an unarmed civilian for no reason: neither had the opportunity to fight back or cause you harm, nor were they a viable threat to anyone but yourself.
|
|
LiamBoyle
Member
Fechtmeister the Clueless of H.A.S.C.
Posts: 478
|
Post by LiamBoyle on Oct 24, 2010 13:55:25 GMT
Vincent, I suppose you are not familiar with the origin of the 21 foot rule in Law Enforcement circles. There is a 2006 FBI bulletin available on the web where it is being argued the 21 feet is not enough consideration for an assailant armed with an edged weapon, even one as innocuous as my own EDC box cutter (1" blade). The full text of the article is available here: www.thefreelibrary.com/Edged+wea ... 0144096212 Some excerpts: "Recently, a number of knives that can be deployed much more rapidly than the balisong and, yet, are legal to carry in most jurisdictions have been marketed to the civilian population. The emergence of the one-handed opening knife presents a much greater threat as someone can draw it quickly from a pocket and open it in less than a second" ("The Free Library"). "Frequently, individuals carry one-handed opening knives in their front pants pockets on the strong side of their bodies. Officers can easily identify these weapons by a metal clip that extends 1 1/2 to 2 inches out of a suspect's pocket" ("The Free Library"). [It should be noted here that the metal clip is fading in popularity among hardware store knife brands with a matte plastic clip, usually black. This can be very difficult to spot against dark clothing such as black or navy work pants. I have owned several of this type to included my Spyderco.] ("The Free Library") "In one study, for example, 45 percent of edged-weapon attacks resulted in death from a single stab or slash" ("The Free Library"). "Law enforcement encounters tend to take place face-to-face, which may give a subject an advantage in an edged-weapon encounter. Consequently, officers need to be aware of the presence of knives and other edged weapons to reduce the delay in their reaction times" ("The Free Library"). "Edged weapons: traditional and emerging threats to law enforcement." The Free Library. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 01 Mar 2006. Web. 24 Oct 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Larry Jordan on Oct 24, 2010 16:38:13 GMT
In most knife attacks the person (civilian) struck doesn't realize that he's been knifed ( The Logic of Steel by James Lafond). His first thought is that someone slugged him. Then he notices the blood. The astute student of self-defense will attempt to use a level of awareness that will anticipate such an occurrence. He may see movement toward him, but he may not see the knife (an experience knifer will hide the blade). Drawing one's weapon under such a circumstance may be deemed an inappropriate/unlawful response. (It's an entirely worthwhile discussion to explore what a defender might do: evasion, use of barriers, etc., when such movement is perceived.) See above. Do you fence? (An accurate treatment of distance is critical here.) My arm and sword extend a little beyond 4 feet. Lunging (extending the forward leg) extends the reach to 6 feet. That easily cuts the head/throat area. If you step back, a trained fencer will maintain the distance--shuffle+lunge. (It would be a good exercise to practice one's draw against an opponent with a padded sword/escrima stick so that one can see how effective going for one's handgun combined with other evasive techniques can be. Practice both with and without headgear for a sobering experience.)
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 20:57:37 GMT
liam: That's some interesting stuff, but for the most part, I was angling towards a civilian vs. civilian scenario since that's what most of us are. Plus, where I'm from, most cops are a-holes who don't give a damn about you, so I doubt they'd be rushing to a person's defense in this situation. The only way a civilian could defend themselves in a situation is if they are aware of said rule and, even then, unless it is actual law, it won't hold up around here. @larry: I already explained about the lunge, but it's good to have someone who actually knows more about fencing than I do elaborate.
|
|
LiamBoyle
Member
Fechtmeister the Clueless of H.A.S.C.
Posts: 478
|
Post by LiamBoyle on Oct 24, 2010 21:02:10 GMT
Even for a civilian vs civilian confrontation, we can look at how law enforcement handles such situations and use them as guidelines for our own responses. And Vince, even with a bad leg I can cover over six feet in two steps. It doesn't take long to take two steps. Although, I will say for home defense a firearm is the best bet, there are those who have defended their home with edged weapons.
|
|
|
Post by f.m. on Oct 24, 2010 21:06:43 GMT
i saw a video a while back of security camera footage, some guy walking into a bank, and he just went up to someone and stabbed them a couple times, then ran to a couple more people and did the same thing (they were trying to run but he caught up to at least one that i could tell) but anyway the first guy, even when approached from the front had no idea what was coming till the blade was already in him my humble 2 cents is that if someone comes up to you(especially arm's length away) and pulls a gun or a knife, you're definitely in trouble unless you saw it coming(unlikely) I would venture to guess that an attacker on the street with any intelligence at all would want to be as discrete as possible, since he wants to just attack you, not be attacked. if they want to rob you, most robbers are reluctant to do much more than intimidate someone. so I cant imagine a situation where someone's going to pull a weapon on you from much more than conversation distance and charge at you. that being said, i suppose if you had a split second from seeing him pull out his weapon before it's all the way out, and you had a weapon RIGHT there that you can literally just pick up(cock it if applicable) and use, then you can shoot him, or if its a carjacker or something and you do have a second to reach for something(i'd most definitely choose a gun over anything) I'm very pro carry and pro firearms, but I feel like there's a lot of hollywood effects regarding self defense being taken as practical, even on here. no ninja flipping or flitting around and stabbing someone from 15 feet away before they react, no knife throwing, and no elaborate theatrics of the sort..it's gonna be just brutal point and shoot/stab im afraid.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Oct 24, 2010 21:16:12 GMT
Oh, I know; I can cover ground pretty quickly myself, even with two bad knees. However, the point I was trying to make is that using that police rule as a defense is tenuous at best, seeing as it's not law, especially where I'm from and the cops are uncooperative jerks; it's not the cops who decide your fate, but the jury. If the jury is ignorant of this rule and the cops make no move to inform them then all the members of the jury, and even the judge mostly likely, will see is that you shot a man with a knife when he was still more than a dozen feet away and couldn't have harmed you at that point in time.
|
|