Defensive knives

[9mmepiphany]

No, it doesn't.

As I've said before, you're applying standards and understanding to the defensive use of a knife that aren't applicable. If you don't have the training, I'd highly recommend that you get some to better understand what we are discussing.

You've already admitted to not being familiar with the pertinent laws. Wouldn't you think it negligent to advise courses of action when you are on uncertain ground.

If you just want to know, admit that you don't know and ask a question. Taking a stand and waiting to be corrected seems a bit counter productive at best and starts to border on trolling at worst

 

[GLOOB]

I find it weird that knives are so "weaponized" in our culture. Everyone of us has used a kitchen knife that is 7+ inches long on a regular basis. And 0.0001% of us have ever used a knife for fighting.

I showed my Opinel #8 to a friend from the younger generation, the other day. For those that aren't familiar, it's a small wood-handled folding knife with a blade about as thin as a butter knife. And a steel so soft that the edge isn't a whole lot sharper than a butter knife.

When I showed him the locking ring, his words were "Oh, so you could do some damage with that!?"

 

[9mmepiphany]

I understand that it is a psychological holdover from out mother warning us to be careful to not get cut...so we now have a inherent fear that things that are sharp will cut us. It doesn't have to be rational, but the fear is usually out of all proportion to the danger...it is like most folks fear getting shot with an arrow more than a gun.


There is also a perception that knives are inherently evil...but this is offset by other folks who are drawn to the mystic qualities of swords (long knives). I've been in a park practicing with staffs and spears and never raised an eyebrow, but I've been accosted many more times if we break out the training knives...even the brightly colored ones

 

[hso]

Doesn't this fall into the whole shooting to wound kinda thing?

No, entirely different. A handgun isn't reliable as a stopping means since there is far less chance of hitting that moving target arm/hand at the remove of a handgun much less severing the tendon or muscle. OTOH, at contact range, required for a blade, you can intercept or intersect the moving arm/hand and have a chance of rendering it useless to the attacker.

 

[JShirley]

As I pointed out in the other thread, the "shooting to maim" laws were intended to address malicious wounding, not legitimate self-defense.

 

[Sentryau2]

I do have training, I've never been in a knife fight. Just go to this website http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/knifefighting.html I could hash it out with you all in this debate. Maybe its my fault I'm not getting my point across. I've been editing my one post to avoid spamming this thread with my posts.

I'm done posting on this thread, I'll still be watching it but I'll give others a chance to chime in.

The use of a knife IS the use of lethal force no matter how you look at it.

 

[JShirley]

Yes, using a knife against another human IS "lethal force" legally, but that is better understood as *potentially* lethal force (since the vast majority of those cut or stabbed do NOT die). A knife is considered a deadly weapon, but because of the ways and situations it is most effective, it is much easier to defend with one in a way that is damaging, but unlikely to be lethal.

Firearms shoot projectiles. They excel at stopping a threat outside contact distance. Knives require contact distance. This difference in employment means that attacking an aggressor's limbs is not only considerably more achievable, it is in fact the preferred method for legitimate defense.
John

 

[hso]

The use of a knife IS the use of lethal force no matter how you look at it.

Yes, under the law that is the view.

Maybe, in a defensive situation it can be used specifically to injure/disable/incapacitate AND/OR it can be used in a manner to stop an attacker through causing exsanguination (loss of blood) or damage to major organ that can, and does, result in death.

That point is actually two points, legally and practically. Legally because it can cause death it is lethal. Practically, it can be used to stop through incapacitation or death.

 

[Baba Louie]

Anyone remember the hunter in Alaska who was attacked by a Kodiak bear and used his Buck folder (IIRC) to save his life?

Whilst cleaning a deer, here comes Miss Bear who took umbrage to his presence. He survived, Bear expired. Defensive use with small knife for the win. Lethal.

Again, IIRC, I think he sent it back to Buck, blood, hair and all.

I think this is the event... (but doing a google search, I find there are a couple of incidents of man, bear and knife interactions so I could be wrong)

http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/larry-mueller-and-marguerite-reiss/2007/09/last-stand

I know we're discussing mano e mano defensive use, but getting into an altercation with someone (or a bruin) using a blade against mild mannered moi, it does not sound like it would be the kind of thing to do daily, if ever.

Therefore, some serious training would be mandatory in my book if I were to carry a blade for honest to goodness defensive use. YMMV

 

[lobo9er]

baba I just read that story... no thanks, chances are slim to none I will ever have a similar experience but its a reminder to bring a sidearm of some sort whenever in the woods in addition to rifle while hunting. Hogs, bear, big cats, wild dog or rabid coyotes anything is possible. I have heard of some pretty nasty raccoons, yikes. slim but you never know

And to stay on topic of course a knife can be helpful in any situation and be it a SD scenario I'd go with the biggest sharpest one I can carry legally and comfortably, ideally.