Let's talk aluminum baseball bats

Haven't played softball in over 10 years, but used to. Other day I was perusing the massive spring collection at Academy and ended up buying a couple that were marked way down - one for softball, and one just for playing around and/or self-defense. Have to say, I really like these. The differences are in the length and weight of course.

All the ones I bought had the 2.25" barrels:

The softball bat is 34 inches, 26 oz. Feels about right for slow-pitch softball, though I'd have preferred a 32 inch, 24-25 oz one for myself (at 5' 8" tall and 170 lbs).

The bat I bought that I think would be handy for self-defense is a "Little League Baseball" bat, and it's 32 inches and 19.5 oz. Feels very lively and good in the hand.

Another bat that felt super-lively was a "Fastpitch Softball" bat, and it was only 28 inches long, and only 18 oz. But I'm sure it could crack some noggins in a self-defense situations.

Anyone else get a kick out of these for something besides baseball/softball?

While that's not what this thread is about, and while I had and have no intention of doing it (making a mace or spiked club), I am absolutely floored by the responses of sm, timbo, Art, and hso.

Absolutely incredible to me, that *talking about* a particular homemade weapon, which is far less deadly than a GUN fercripessake (ya know, the main thrust of the entire forum), is somehow a faux paus.

How is a spiked club any more "evil" or "illegal" (allegedly) than the many many threads on axes, spears, halberds, swords, hatchets, shovels, etc., etc., etc.?

And it's not illegal either *necessarily*, either; rather, its legality (possession of a spiked club) is going to vary state to state and country to country, and almost certainly the majority of states would not find it illegal for use in the HOME. Note that neither my original post, nor the initial suggestion of the spiked club, express or implied any use outside the home, and therefore any potential illegal use via "carrying", which is perhaps illegal in some states.

I remain quite shocked and very very by the the kneejerk responses here, in a "Non-Firearm WEAPONS" forum.

Advocating something as incredibly foolish as making a bat into a mace is, aside from being illegal, not in any way acceptable for any member of THR. That idea has to work its way upward to reach "contempt".

Click to expand...

That is saying that "aside" from illegality (alleged), this is inherently wrong somehow. WTH?? Would it be ok if purchased instead of homemade or what? This is way way off base, for the very intelligent, savvy, learned, and (ordinarily) logical moderator and friend Art, IMO.

I really think a *modification* of opinions is warranted here, no? Or, perhaps there is something I do not understand about the parameters of discussion of this subforum.

Actually, no, it's not the same at all. Adding to the *actual effectiveness* of a weapon's ability to incapacitate is not all the same as adding words evidencing a reasonably-inferred intent to kill (improper when the intent should be to stop an attack).

And even if it was, it's STILL not the same as what Art suggested, that it's "incredibly foolish", implying that's somehow inherently "evil" to modify a weapon to make it more capable of rapid incapacitation. I submit that making an already deadly weapon into a different deadly weapon with a greater ability to quickly incapacitate is not necessarily foolish, and in fact not foolish at all if it's the only weapon you have; to the contrary, it's quite wise. In fact, the sentiment expressed is indistinguishable from chastising someone for using those deadly hollowpoint bullets in a gun used for self-defense. Takes a weapon, and makes it more effective than it previously was (with the unfortunate but acceptable side effect that it also happens to make it more deadly). These attitudes would doubtless fit in seamlessly in NJ, where a citizens' use of hollowpoints is illegal.

Look at the picture posted by timbo. I submit that just LOOKING at someone weilding that thing in self-defense is gonna cause a certain percentage of otherwise-determined thugs to flee in fear, actually saving them some bodily harm, not to mention that of the victim, possibly. It's quite fear-invoking. This is a GOOD thing, in a self-defense weapon, as it can work to AVOID violence.

Sure, I can see that, but (a) there's a difference between discussing the wisdom of using weapon 'X' in political climate & jury pool 'Y', and banning the topic from discussion, along with chastising those who brought it up. And, (b) I see your point, but I submit that that attitude is one of meek peasants, not citizens in a country where legitimate self-defense is perfectly legal.

I for one think that it is indeed a pretty good idea to keep a ball & glove if you carry a bat in a vehicle. But in the home, I don't think you need any justification for the deadliest, quickest-incapacitating weapon you can legally get your hands on.