NAA Mini vs knife

[Kleanbore]

Posted by rori: Get your arm around their neck and drive your 8" knife under or thru the ribs and they die silently and relatively fast.

Do you consider that a viable technique for self defense?

 

[ball3006]

Open carry was addressed in the original post under "carry"..................chris3

 

[mljdeckard]

I can't imagine why either would need to be exclusive. I keep my knife on the weak side pocket, the mini would be around my neck.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

So, you can make pistol hits at "whatever" distance? At what distance do you no longer consider a circumstance self-defence? Self defense isn't a duel. It happens faster than a blink & closer than body odor. Usually in the dark.

8" knife under or thru the ribs

And you can BET I consider that "a viable technique for self-defense". At that point in the fight I'm no longer in a defensive mindset. I'm in an offensive mindset taking the fight TO MY ASSAILANT. And I will continue to do so violently until the threat is completely negated.

 

[Hoppes Love Potion]

I carry both the NAA Black Widow (22 Mag) and an automatic knife. I've had a lot more practice with the Black Widow. I can shoot it accurately one-handed.

More than once I have concealed the NAA in my hand in unsavory places. Just a precaution walking back to the car in the dark, etc. I don't want to use either but the Black Widow is first and foremost in my strategy.

 

[2WheelsGood]

Self defense isn't a duel. It happens faster than a blink & closer than body odor.

Something tells me Suzanna Hupp would disagree.

These arguments for a knife as a primary self defense tool are absolutely laughable. Why not just outfit the military with knives instead of guns? Think of the money we'll save! The police too.

The fact is, the mere presence of a gun has stopped countless robberies and home invasions, not to mention rapes and kidnappings. Even without firing a shot. This is the real world, not a Stallone movie.

 

[2WheelsGood]

All four pages of this thread boil down to one 15 second video.

 

[dev_null]

I have a hard time imagining the circumstances in which displaying the NAA (let's set aside the brandishing laws for a moment) would be a deterrent to an assailant.

"What is that thing? Your keychain? A GUN??? Bwah-hah-hah, yeah, right."

No, I believe the only way it would stop someone from attacking you would be to actually use it.

As for soldiers (who said anything about military uses of the NAA?), I believe most of them DO carry knives.

 

[2WheelsGood]

I have a hard time imagining the circumstances in which displaying the NAA (let's set aside the brandishing laws for a moment) would be a deterrent to an assailant.

This thread veered beyond just the NAA before the end of the first page.

 

[Strykervet]

I guess one would be like bringing a knife to a gunfight and the other would be like, well, bringing a knife to a gunfight. I suppose the little revolver would be more useful if for nothing else than psychological impact. Better make 'em count though. A knife, it requires training to use effectively.

Someone makes a titanium .45ACP derringer the size of a cell phone and 5/8" thick. Problem is it costs $900. When they half the price, I'll be getting one. For the meantime, my 340PD is as small as I go.

 

[conw]

Just get a big enough gun and carry a knife too.

They both have advantages and disadvantages. If we make a fairly apples to apples comparison of an NAA to a knife (i.e. close range in a SD situation where you deploy the item within touching distance), here is how I would break it down:

Ease of use:
The knife can be used with zero training (I know...) and still hurt the bad guy. The NAA requires some training or practice to use.
The nod goes to the knife.

Risk of unintentional injury:
I would argue it's approximately equally easy to cut one's own fingers, and shoot one's own fingers, with the knife or NAA, respectively. However, if we consider the way "most" people use a gun at close range, there is more risk of unintentional injury to innocent bystanders, etc.
Slight safety nod to the knife.

Ability to do damage:
The argument can be made that .22LR to the occipital cavity or to center mass, vital organs, is a fight stopper, and it is. However, the ability to make precision shots follows a bell curve - extreme close distance makes it very hard to make precision shots, as does extreme long distance, with any gun. Likelihood of getting the fight stopping shot at close range is close to zero. On the other hand the knife is really unlikely to stop the fight quickly at all, but has a much greater lifespan of use in the fight. The NAA has a limited number of shots but in a tangle the knife keeps devastating. And while the NAA can be muzzle-averted, it's very difficult to deflect repeat knife jabs or stabs.
Nod goes to the knife.

Finally it's important to consider carry options. I am not aware of a way to carry a NAA mini that is:
-Reliable and consistent to the same degree an OWB knife sheath or OWB or IWB gun holster is
-Safe for use under stress at close quarters (I mean, look at the things... you want to fish in your pocket for THAT when someone's kicking your head in? and the neck holsters should be awarded "worst 'tactical' idea ever")
-Fast (it's small and fumble-prone no matter how you cut it, and hard to reconcile with tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) that also work for safe handling of full-sized guns)
Nod goes to the knife

 

[exavid]

Neither would be my first choice but the question was whether you'd rather have the NAA mini-revolver or a knife. I vote for the NAA. I had a Mini .22Mag with the 1 5/8" barrel. It was reasonably accurate one handed at 10yds. The magnum has a pretty good punch compared to the LR. As already mentioned it's LOUD. You don't want to fire it without ear protection. Sounds a lot bigger than it is. It isn't as slow to draw or shoot than some think. I no longer carry it because I have an LCP but up until then the NAA was the most concealable gun I had. In reality, without considering the OP's original question of course I'd rather have a short barrelled 12ga with #1 buck in it than either.

 

[PoserHoser]

How about a beretta bobcat and a knife

 

[JFrame]

Open carry was addressed in the original post under "carry"..................chris3

Chris -- I think the OP's point was that the knife theoretically offered more latitude for carrying options (or carrying at all). It was not an endorsement of open carry of a mini, per se.


.

 

[JFrame]

The fact is, the mere presence of a gun has stopped countless robberies and home invasions, not to mention rapes and kidnappings. Even without firing a shot. This is the real world, not a Stallone movie.

I suppose the little revolver would be more useful if for nothing else than psychological impact. Better make 'em count though. A knife, it requires training to use effectively.

Not to argue the point either way, because I have no idea (and hope never to find out), but there does seem to be anecdotal indication that a gun -- almost any gun -- has a greater intimidation factor than a knife.

I read an article about make-shift weapons in prisons. It was stated in the article that the crudest zip-gun had more intimidation value than even the finest examples of knives constructed in the machine shop as an "extracurricular activity."


.

 

[ball3006]

So, some of you guys are saying that a bad guy would completely ignore several bullet holes in his body from a 22 because it is a mouse caliber? I would rather take a slash on the arm, blocking a knife attack than a third eye from a 22 round. The NAA rules this discussion hands down. The hundreds of squirrels I have shot with a 22 will agree....chris2

 

[mljdeckard]

It is certainly possible that a bad guy can take several hits from a .22 and keep coming yes. It is also possible to take several hits from a service pistol caliber and keep coming, but much less likely. I suppose that will help you the next time you are attacked by a squirrel.

The reason I would prefer the gun, even if it's small, is because no matter how effective the knife is, you need to be too close to use it. The whole idea is to stop the bad guy BEFORE they get that close. Real life might not always give you the chance. But if you only have a knife, you don't have a choice.

 

[nickn10]

I am a retired correctional officer from the Colorado Dept of Corrections. I also was an armed escort officer for transporting prisoners. We were informed and knew that a knife attack was the most probable scenario. Without prior warning, situational awareness and extreme luck you were going to be stuck! Closure rate before awareness and reaction was 20 ft. minimum. Consequently 2 officers transported, one controlling the prisoner and the other stand aside hand on weapon. In the cell house, no weapons are allowed, you are at as big a risk as anyone else walking in a bad neighborhood. Training helps you observe unusual behavior but a determined attack is probably going to succeed.
Nick

 

[GEM]

Just curious. There are well documented instances of the NAA minis being used in self defense.

Would those who say they are useless, please come up with instances of these guns failing in self-defense and compare them to the rate of failure of other hand guns in self-defense?

 

[JFrame]

Just curious. There are well documented instances of the NAA minis being used in self defense.

Would those who say they are useless, please come up with instances of these guns failing in self-defense and compare them to the rate of failure of other hand guns in self-defense?

That's a very interesting question!

.

 

[conw]

So, some of you guys are saying that a bad guy would completely ignore several bullet holes in his body from a 22 because it is a mouse caliber? I would rather take a slash on the arm, blocking a knife attack than a third eye from a 22 round. The NAA rules this discussion hands down. The hundreds of squirrels I have shot with a 22 will agree

I can't say "a" bad guy "would" ignore hits from a .22 but I will say that bad guys HAVE and COULD ignore them, or any caliber. I overheard a discussion on TTPs for shooting insurgents in Iraq, an infantry guy said 7-9 shots minimum, per shooter, go on the bad guy. He had personally seen one guy take 17+ shots COM, crawl off, and live to testify.

There's a gap between what is likely and what is possible, and the way we make our decisions needs to take into account not only probability, but consequence. There are outliers that should still influence our decision making because the cost of relying on an "expected" response could be your life.

 

[dirtengineer]

I am surprised no one is saying anything about Crocodile Dundee.

 

[Nushif]

Actually, someing just popped into my head here. One of the pointsnof debate is silence.

Keep in mind that silence is usually a boon for the attacker, not the defender. Whether a knife is more silent than a gun is irrelevant, as I like to think we would break the silence posthaste with police sirens or a request for help.

 

[03Shadowbob]

I can hit a pie plate all day long at 7 yards with my NAA Minimag. I'll take the 22mag NAA over a knife.

 

[AK103K]

Those pie plates are really dangerous, especially when still and glaring at you.

Not picking on anyone here, just a general pet peeve of mine. Reality isnt those tight little groups you leisurely shoot at "round" targets at the range. Its what what you can do on demand, under stress. How are you with it when you and the target are moving under "realistic" time constraints?