Home defense: axe better than gun? (from another forum)

[MatthewVanitas]

Not attempting to provoke a forum-war here, so not linking to the original discussion.

Long story short: someone on another forum posted about keeping a tomahawk/hatchet by the bedside for home defense. This quickly turned into a big discussion with many folks arguing that a tomahawk is superior to a gun for home defense. Some of their arguments:

-- silent, won't alert neighbors (when asked why the heck that was good, they claimed that neighbors will come running to your house and complicate things if they hear gunshots)

-- can instantly incapacitate an attacker, or selectively immobilize their weapon-carrying hand rendering them combat-ineffective

-- can strike with the flat of blade for non-lethal hits (if he's not dangerous enough to be worth slicing, why are you hitting him at all?)

-- defeats body armor (when questioned, he replied that he can "defeat" the armor by aiming at unarmored limbs or head; wow, how unlike a gun!)

-- won't look as bad in court (b/c anti-gunners love axe-murderers)


etc. etc.

Particularly odd was that the main pro-axe guy is an enlisted grunt who did a tour in Baghdad last year, or so claims. His Iraq-related posts seem very reasonable though, so I'm not immediately inclined to disbelieve him. Military training and civilian pragmatism don't necessarily have any relation.


So I thought I'd toss up the same question amongst the good folks of THR. Assuming you're in the U.S. and can legally own a gun in your area, is there any circumstance under which you would prefer to have a tomahawk or axe rather than a gun for home defense?

Or is this just testosterone-poisoning in its final stages?

-MV

 

[[email protected]]

Assuming you're in the U.S. and can legally own a gun in your area, is there any circumstance under which you would prefer to have a tomahawk or axe rather than a gun for home defense?

Hmm... Well, it's cheaper and easier to acquire than a firearm. few other reasons I can think of, but I'm not sure it's appropriate to post them on this forum *reviews the rules*

 

[BetaShooter]

I would be worried I was bringing a hatchet to a gun fight...

I honestly can't see how an axe, or similar tool, would be superior to a gun. Better than nothing, yes. Better than a gun, no.

 

[DogBonz]

I wouldn't want to get hit with either one

I *can* see where a Tomahawk like the American Tomahawk Companies version could be really nasty in the hands of someone who knows how to use it and has the home field advantage. Would I take one for HD over my USP45? HELL NO!

But they are pretty cool.

 

[Sniper X]

I guss this thread prooves you can justify anything by a bunch of very thin "beter because of" examples. Unless you are a ninja, or a Cherokee warrior, I sugest that a Tomohawk is NOT your first line of defense weapon. Shoot, I studied Kendo for a few years and have a couple "real" Katanas but would never think of grabbing that far supeior weapon to a hatchet before my 1911 Kimber with a 10 round mag. Eve w Wakizashi would be better than a Hawk! And still not in my first three choices for a defensive weapon for home use.

 

[Cosmoline]

In theory, a good axe can do a lot more damage than your average sidearm, and can cut a katana in half like a loaf of bread. But that doesn't make it idea for home defense. You need to have the time and space to get a swing going, and you need something with more gravitas than a little hawk. Given a choice between getting shot with a 9mm and getting hit with a full swing from my felling axe, I'd take the bullet no question. But in the dark inside a house, you're not likely to get a full swing on an easy target. A short stabbing weapon is more practical among non-firearm weapons.

 

[Sniper X]

Well Cosmo, I hesitate to beleive a HAwk can cut a Katana in half knowing what a Katana can do but if one guy was armed with a Hawk, even if he was good and I was armed with a Katana he would be less a hawk in about 3 pico seconds and I would be declaired the winner. Anyway a Katana with a reach of oh say 4.5 feet and a hawk with a reach of 2 feet would be no contest. You are right about the swing angle-space though. And on eneeds more with a Katana than a hawk.

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

Sniper, can I suggest being less of a couch commando? No offense but to sit there and brag about what you claim you can do with a sword isn't going to impress people on this site.

What about a machete with a point? I am curious to how that would stack up against a tomahawk in terms of "home defense."

 

[Mandirigma]

-- defeats body armor (when questioned, he replied that he can "defeat" the armor by aiming at unarmored limbs or head; wow, how unlike a gun!)

I'm sure they are there, but how many home invaders or burglers use body armor? The stuff's heavy don't cha know, usually they want to be in and out, and unencumbered to run if it goes sideways, or to be off with thier loot.

Two other ways to beat body armor. First off, Hit it. Yes the armor would stop the bullet, but what about transfer of all that kinetic energy? BG will still feel it. Still get knocked down. Then you got soft parts to aim at.

And the other way is Aim low. They've yet to come up with good armor for the lower body. Granted I usually think of a shotgun with 04 Buck for this (I live in an apartment so need to worry about rule #4) versus a handgun but it translates well.

My other concern is, multiple attackers/invaders/burglers. You close with a tomahawk with one and get blind sided by another.

In the course of my training I've learned that close quarters is NOT somewhere you want to be in the best of times, let alone with you aren't fully aware of the situation.

 

[hso]

Assuming you're in the U.S. and can legally own a gun in your area, is there any circumstance under which you would prefer to have a tomahawk or axe rather than a gun for home defense?

Or is this just testosterone-poisoning in its final stages?

Do any of you guys think I don't have axes, tomahawks, spears, swords, knives, shotguns, rifles and or handguns available to me (and that I've trained with all of them to one extent or another)? While I wouldn't pass up any of them on the way to a gun from a home defense standpoint I can't think of why I would pass the gun up in favor of one of them?

 

[sm]

There is no "One-Size-Fits-All" for one's personal safety.
There is no Holy Grail between "tools" or within the same "tool" category.

More time training the brain and less time rationalizing and agonizing over "things".
Software - Not Hardware.

Only one "tool" is with a person 24/7/365 and that is the brain.
Then again no tool is ever better than said user of said tool.
If the brain is not trained, and exercised - even this "tool" the brain is not effective.


Individual assessments of Development, Maturity, Physical, Emotional, Cultural, Religious, Spiritual, Mental - all play a role in personal safety and well being.

Restrictions imposed by Federal, State, County, City, and even more local such as a Campus, whether is be a workplace campus or school campus.

Time comes into play as well.
For instance when younger a person living in a college dorm with restrictions imposed not only by State Law, also College Restrictions, with room checks could in fact keep a Softball bat handy, and played softball and kept in "training" and "practice".

Car wreck a few years later and shoulder surgery limits physically the ability to effectively use this softball bat.
Mindset is still there, person is still taking prudent steps to avoid trouble getting into residence, just the physical body does not allow that person the most effective use of that softball bat.

Avoidance and taking prudent steps to Avoid and Deter Trouble is always the keys.

Distance is your friend. Firearms do allow one to defend outside of the death circle.

Death Circle is what my Mentors called being inside personal space.

Edged weapons used within this circle most often means BOTH/ ALL parties are going to get cut, stabbed, slashed and bleed!

Blunt objects within this Death circle often means BOTH/ALL persons are going to take blows.

Understand and I base this not only from growing up around Veterans , with eyes missing, arms missing, legs missing, also from Civilians involved in altercations, having later worked in Main OR , Jury Duty and in taking some Classes, visited the Morgue were Med Students had dead bodies to learn from.


Distance is always your friend.

I prefer a firearm.

Real life stuff from Jury duty. Perp is holding knife and has a family member.
State Law allows one to use force to stop an immediate threat to self, family or others of disparity.

.22 rifle from a distance, stopped this immediate threat. Just across the small room, using concealment, cover of wall in hallway.

Another. Lady wakes up to find someone in her bedroom with a knife, the snub nosed .38spl under the pillow stopped that immediate threat without a shot being fired at less than 3 feet. Withing the Death Circle.

I CCW , even at home. My concerns have always been entering, exiting a structure and answering a door. I cannot / don't walk around with a long arm slung.
Home gun is a shotgun with slugs. IF, and I hope it never happens, IF someone has another person held against their will , my choice, the one I have trained and practiced to do, is from a distance fire a shotgun slug.
One projectile not multiple pellets.

One jury I was foreman on, a perp got into the car of an attractive lady he noticed going into business place. He simply used a coat hanger and let himself in as her parking spot was sorta hidden from view.
He had stalked and knew what time she got off work.

He popped up as she left this dimly lit lot and used a hunting knife and forced her drive to a remote spot.

This was a popular two door sporty car of the time with bucket seats.
Lady went into "honeybadger" mode as soon as she stopped the car - abruptly.

She fought like a honeybadger. That car had blood everywhere and all over the inside.

She survived, so did the perp later caught at a hospital.

We the jury saw the car, not only pictures, the real car. We saw the ER pictures or her body. Plastic surgery to reattach a breast, and DEEP nasty cuts all over her body. She for some reason did not get any facial or neck cuts, her hands and arms, also required surgeries.

The Perp...hurt worse than she. He spent his time in a hospital, he will never father kids and has a prosthesis to pee from. He lost an eye, part of an ear, and ugly and nasty.

State Law said because this lady was not 21 y/o she could not CCW.

Distance is your friend.

 

[Cosmoline]

Well Cosmo, I hesitate to beleive a HAwk can cut a Katana in half

Go look at my post again. I'm talking about an AXE, boyo. Different animal. I think we need to have a little mythbusting re. the strength of the vaunted Jap swords

 

[Sniper X]

Oh, don;t satrt name calling here on this thread there HMH. It won;t win you any freinds. What I'm doing is stating a fact that even if you look at history you see that the Hawk is not as good a weapon in most circumstances as a sword. Do you honestly think that in reality a guy armed with a tomohawk can take on someone with a Katana? I find that laughable!

Oh yeah, and have you not heard of the saying "you aren't bragging if you can do what you say."? And BTW, I wasn't bragging, if you actually read my post instead of reading into my post you will see I am making a point....not bragging.

 

[Sniper X]

Cosmo, I guess I have to give you that because I guess if you laid a laminated blade katana on the ground and chopped at it with a hatchet or Axe depending on the size of the axe you would ba able to chep it in half. But that seems a little "movie BS" in a real fight between a guy with an axe and a guy with a Katana.

 

[Cosmoline]

An AXE me boyo, an AXE. Several pounds of solid Swedish steel that really can cut through a car door. I've done it. Just like The Matrix

But seriously, I agree that a big felling axe has too much wind-up time and too small a head to be of any utility indoors, and it's only marginally useful out of doors. A stabbing weapon is better because it requires less wind up, doesn't leave you exposed, and can inflict great injury with far less muscle power behind it. A dinky tactical hawk isn't much good for anything. If you really wanted to use an axe-like weapon, one of the Gransfors special edition viking blades would be a possibility, but without extensive training you'd be likely to chop your own legs off. They're not balanced like a forestry axe.

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

I wasn't calling you names.

And like it was stated before: Software > Hardware.

A guy with a Katana vs a guy with a tomahawk is a moot point. Just because one weapon is superior (in certain circumstances) doesn't mean the guy with the tomahawk will lose. Ever heard of "puncher's chance?"

I am glad you are confident with your abilities with a sword, but just remember home defense takes place inside a home. 4.5 feet of reach may become more of a hinderence than an asset.

 

[rustymaggot]

im a big fan of real world examples. for instance, in the old west id assume that both a tomahawk and a pistol were available. if a hawk was even a contender, then why didnt we hear about it? no, the gun wins. it was the popular choice among a society who would be willing to use deadly force alot more commonly than we do. the guns worked and they worked better.

we dont hear sayings like 'god created man, sam colt made them equal' for nothing. ive never heard a peep about tomahawks like that.

besides, the technology for guns has grown with leaps and bounds. i cant say that the tomahawk has improved much over the years.


the tomahawk holds its own in its class, as a hand held edged weapon. you can argue its a projectile, but if so then its a single shot with no reload capability and your enemy has it when your done. dont miss eh?

 

[Sniper X]

I didn't say Id use a sword in HD, I said I'd use a Kimber Tac II custom....I was making a point about a sword being a better weapon than an axe...not for HD, but in a feild or whatever, but not in a confined space...OK? So I guess we are both on the same page now?

 

[Sniper X]

I do agree Cosmo, and in a fight between a Viking armed with a Viking battle axe, and a Samurai with a Katana who do you think would win? "I think" from my experinece would have to say the Viking if he didn;t get a kill with the first swipe of the axe would be the looser....BTW Cosmo, show a full pic of that cool looking axe!

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

That is a little off topic, but I will play along.

It all depends on the players behind the weapon. Weapons don't kill people, people kill people.

Training, situation specifics, and opportunity all attribute to survival.

 

[Cosmoline]

Probably the katana. It's a far more advanced weapon with a fully developed martial art around it. But then again we don't know very much about axe fighting techniques of the vikings. They had more options than merely doing a big two-handed swing, and their axes were pretty strange. IIRC, what we think of as a norse axe is really a ceremonial burial axe. The recreations of fighting axes I've handled were very different from wedge-headed utility axes. The heads are heavy and broad. I'm not sure how they went about using them. Here's one:

 

[Geno]

Define "better".

To me, it is "better" to be legal. In MI, an axe is not legal for defensive purpose, nor is a knife, sword, etc. Pistols, yes. That is why MI opted for the title MCPL (Michigan Concealed Pistol License). Conceal a knife, axe, etc see where you go?

Doc2005

 

[SpookyPistolero]

This notion can only exist in those who've seen 'The Patriot' one too many times.

The hawk/axe has less ability to do incapacitating terminal damage than a combat firearm.

The hawk/axe requires a minium movement process to be effective (and associated unencumbered space).

A BG can (and likely will) still have a lot of fight left in him after a blade hit.

A hawk/axe hit is less forgiving of poor location of the strike.

But the most important reason of all is that I have to get near the BG to make a hit with the hawk/axe, which means I'm more likely to have to get into a physical fight, where the odds are a lot less stacked in my favor. Why would I do that?

I want lots of distance, with the weapon most likely to stop him with minimal hits, that doesn't require any kind of physical build-up to use (low 'activation energy').

To address a few of the arguments from the other forum, I would (for example) want some noise associated with my defensive action. That means people are calling the cops if I haven't had a chance to already. It also means the other guy is no longer able to bank on me being without 'backup'. Plus, I'm a believer that a surprise gunshot will at least go a long way in disorienting him.

The comments about 'instantly incapacitating the BG with a blade hit or choosing to immobilize him' also assume a perfect environment, where you've got complete surprise and choice of environment. How often does that happen?

Would I rather have a hawk than my pocketknife? Sure. Would I keep it next to my bed to save my life and the lives of those I love, compared to a suitable firearm? I don't even know why that's a question...

 

[Whitewolf 508]

Ax fighting

You do not have to swing it to fight. Choke up on it and punch blade forward. Stab with the top point or hook and twist with either end..Many years ago Jeff Cooper had a whole instructional article about the uses of a Viking ax. Very inspirational....

 

[Zero_DgZ]

Cripes, people. You may as well resort to using Claymores for home defense instead. They're more effective than axe, sword, or gun. (The "this side towards enemy" sort, not the William Wallace kind.)