PDA

View Full Version : Gun vs. Knife Follow Up with Video


tonerguy
September 14, 2006, 10:01 PM
The post about guns vs. knives created a flood of strong opinions and great information.

I added Ronny's link to a must-see video that really illustrates what a guy with a knife can do against a guy with a pistol.

Here's a follow up post (http://tinyurl.com/pfjft)that points to gotta-read articles and to the very sobering video itself.

glock19xdsc
September 16, 2006, 07:24 AM
Good video.

I could be mistaken, but the uniforms with the yellow-ish shirts look like those of the German BundesGrenzShutz (BGS, loosely translated as Federal Border Police, parent organization to GSG9).

My former unit (2d ACR) worked with that agency on border security back when there was still a cold war. They were also responsible for passport control, and were the ones that used to (probably still do) hang around airports in Germany with Uzi's. Those people were not slouches.

Chris Phelps
September 16, 2006, 08:06 AM
I could be mistaken, but the uniforms with the yellow-ish shirts look like those of the German BundesGrenzShutz (BGS, loosely translated as Federal Border Police, parent organization to GSG9).



The post where the link for the video can be found...


Here’s a video by a police department in South Africa that shows an simulated knife attack on an armed police officer from differing distances.

glock19xdsc
September 16, 2006, 10:25 AM
I was reeeaaaally mistaken.:o

G56
September 17, 2006, 11:27 PM
It's from Poland, there is a notation in Polish on the page with the video, connected to the original video, and there are links to a website in Poland, I noticed the pl in the url and guessed it was Poland, so I found a translator that would translate Polish.

Original quote:
Obrona przed nozem przy uzyciu pistoletu jest miemozliwa na dystansie 2 metrow. Na dystansie 4 jest trudna. Na dystansie 6 i wiecej metrow jest bardziej prawdopodobna.

Partial translation:
Defense is before at on distance 2 pistol nozem uzyciu miemozliwa metrow. It is hard on distance 4. On distance 6 and it is more credible wiecej metrow.

Here's the website, it's a martial arts website, note the pl for Poland: http://www.itf.prv.pl/

tonerguy
September 17, 2006, 11:48 PM
Well, somebody always finds the source. Good for you.:)

Dave AA
September 25, 2006, 11:47 PM
Sorry, that video is crap. Completely unrealistic, the producer has an agenda. He/She/They are selling video instructional videos.

It's been floating around the intrawebs for quite some time now.

fm2
September 25, 2006, 11:56 PM
Which video is unrealistic?

tonerguy
September 26, 2006, 12:19 AM
Dave, I'm sorry you feel the video is crap.

If what people take away from viewing it is a new question then it's worth viewing. Sounds like you are coming from some expertise and knowledge that many don't have. I hope that's true.

I'd like people who view the video to ask themselves, "What would I do if attacked by a guy with a knife? I thought I had a strategy but I didn't realize my gun might not be a solution. Now what?" It's a new question for many people.

I think the video does the job, but I'd love to have a link to a better video.

You have one?

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 01:02 AM
There are several problems with the video.
Watch the technique of the "officers", they are obviously lacking in training. The first one reaches for his weapon with one hand and grabs the holster with the other. They all try to present the firearm directly in front of them regardless of where the assailant is. They all try to bring the gun to full extension. It looks to me like the makers had an agenda also. The first obvious question is why would your pistol be in the holster? That was one of the things Tueller stressed, the other was to be aware of the environment. Why was the assailant so close to them to begin with and why did the officers stand still and draw instead of (as Tueller suggests) backing up while drawing?

In the hands of a properly trained shooter, a knife is only a serious threat at contact distance. Most people with proper training can be taught to hit a target at 10yards or less in about 1 second, from a duty or cc rig. That is firing from full extension. Learing how to fire using what used to be called the "combat rock" technique, those times can be cut considerably. Tuller's standard was 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. With proper training 2 shots in 1.5 seconds is easy to achieve. From the holster, 4 hits in 1.5 seconds or a Mozmbique drill is possible. With the gun out of the holster, double that.I'll let the internet ninjas tout the virtues of bringing a knife to a gunfight. In reality, a gun in the hands of a properly trained individual trumps a knife hands down.

The one thing that should be take from this video is the same thing that should be taken from the Tueller drill. To use Dennis Tuellar's own words: "Skill at arms and proper mental attitude. that's the combination that will make you the winner in a 'Close Encounter of the Cutting Kind'."

Al Thompson
September 26, 2006, 08:54 AM
Most people with proper training can be taught to hit a target at 10yards or less in about 1 second, from a duty or cc rig.


Obviously I'm lacking in skills. :rolleyes: One of my friends is a high ranked IPSC shooter and he has trouble getting hits from leather in less than 1.25 seconds. With a duty rig or under a jacket, add some time.

FWIW, the South Carolina LE Academy is teaching 30 feet for "danger close" with a knife.

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 09:46 AM
One of my friends is a high ranked IPSC shooter and he has trouble getting hits from leather in less than 1.25 seconds.
Can't be very high ranked then, any M or GM class shooter can do it all day long. One of the long time practice drills is the Bill Drill. Six "A" hits (not just 6 shots) at 10 yards in under 2 seconds starting with the gun in the holster, hands at sides. Most M or GM shooters can do it in the 1.6 - 1.7 range. A skilled shooter can execute a Mozambique drill in 1.25 seconds. I can teach someone to get 1 second hits in one day, it isn't that hard.

I will post a video in the next couple of weeks illustrating my point. Here is a video of a couple of execises using a borrowed Kimber with full power loads. Unfortunately, I don't have a holster since it is a borrowed gun so I slowed down a bit on the presentation. But it illustrates what a skilled shooter is capable of.
http://s89.photobucket.com/albums/k223/Lurper/?action=view&current=Kimberdrills.flv

Samurai
September 26, 2006, 10:24 AM
It's usually the loudest among us that have the least to say...:(

How many among you have actually taken down a knife assailant with a gun? I sure as heck haven't! All I know is what I've been told by my Sensei, who was a field-medic with the Special Forces in Panama, and my Master, who was a point-man in Vietnam. THEY have done this stuff before. And they tell me that scenarios like this video are pretty accurate.

A knife to a blood-vital can disable a person in 10-60 seconds. That's STILL enough time to get a few shots off with a gun. But, when you're talking about what happens AFTER the knife is drawn, you're talking about MUTUAL kills. Do you have plenty of time to shoot? Yes. Do you have plenty of time to shoot BEFORE you are fatally injured? No!

Now, a BULLET to a non-nervous center vital area can disable a person from blood loss in a time range between 1 and 10 minutes! So, unless you hit the brain or the spine, the knife-guy has got about a minute and 30 seconds to cut you to SHREDS! It CAN be done! Again, you're talking about MUTUAL kills.

And, that's the lesson to take away from this discussion. Having a GUN does NOT make you INDESTRUCTIBLE! For those of you who dismiss things like this and assume that having your pistol makes you Superman, I pity your logic, and I pray you are never attacked.

garryc
September 26, 2006, 11:13 AM
In the video I saw an expert knifesman pitted against a barely competant shooter. Notice that the shooters makes no effort to get outside the line of power of the assailant. Nor did any use thier off hand to guard themselves. Why is the cop useing a weaver stance? In doing so he/she gives up rapid lateral movement. The knifesman has an effective range with his weapon that extends no farther than he can reach, They didn't use that fact. In the drill you can see that the cop is in a challange situation, why then is he/she not in a holster ready position?
One thing about drills, They don't simulate real life. How much time is lost because you are not preset for the action? We often talk about awareness levels. You cannot maintain the alert level used in a drill all the time.

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 11:19 AM
And, that's the lesson to take away from this discussion. Having a GUN does NOT make you INDESTRUCTIBLE! For those of you who dismiss things like this and assume that having your pistol makes you Superman, I pity your logic, and I pray you are never attacked.
A more important lesson to be taken is to train to a high level of skill. I never said nor even implied that a gun makes me Superman. Nor did I imply that there was no chance of getting cut or killed. What I did say was that it is foolish to believe that a knife is more lethal than a gun at close range. Yet, that is exactly what many "experts" claim. They base it on the Tueller drill (which doesn't prove that), or on videos like this one. Sure if you pit an expert with a knife against a poorly trained person with a gun, the knife is going to win. But not because the knife is more lethal, but because the user has a higher skill level. Which is exactly the point I was trying to make. In the hands of a skilled user, the pistol is much more lethal than the knife outside of contact distance. Which means you need to train to a high level. You don't have to believe it, but it is easy to prove to yourself (if you have the pistol skills). Additionally, it is equally as hard (I believe harder) to score a incapacitating blow with a knife that with a pistol. Remember, the purpose of firing is to stop your assailant's actions regardless of whether he ultimately dies or not. The other point about the knife-versus-gun threads is that no one acknowledges that the mindset is the most important factor. Often, as in this video, the shooter just stands there and lets the assailant cut them. These things don't happen in a vacuum. I don't think it's a stretch to think that if someone with a knife is within reach you are not going to try to block it with your weak hand.

A bullet is much more likely to incapacitate you faster than a knife. Again, the assumption seems to be 1. that the shooter only gets off 1 shot (except Tuellers standard was 2), 2. the shot does not strike a vital area and 3. the assailant will continue the assault if he has been hit by a bullet. That is why you train to fire until the threat is stopped.

I really don't care to change anyone's opinion who believes it is gospel that a knife is deadlier than a gun. It is the people who read this and wonder if it is really true whose opinion I care about.

FWIW, I have BTDT more than once, have 6 years military experience and have been a professional shooter/instructor for more than 20 years. So I have some knowledge of what I speak. There are enough people on this forum, TFF and Enos' forum who have checked me out and know it's true.

Al Thompson
September 26, 2006, 11:28 AM
Heck, I don't know why you waste your time here. With those skills, you should be actually shooting some IDPA and IPSC so that your champion of both. Then you could open your own school.

Friend is a GM by the way.

I took the video to show that NOT getting off the centerline is a bad idea.

Ronny
September 26, 2006, 12:39 PM
In the video I saw an expert knifesman pitted against a barely competant shooter.

All of us would prefer seeing an expert shooter against incompetent bad guys in general :cool:

I don't see this video being taken for pure dogma, but I think it illustrates a few good points for both the shooter and the knifer:

For the shooter:
1). Learn how to draw and fire from concealment quickly with economy of motion.
2). Move and evade while firing.

For the knifer:
1). Close distance deceptively to at least 3 feet. As long as the gunman is a decent law-abider and cannot see your knife, he/she will most likely not shoot you for fear of prosecution by authorities.
2). Lunge with full body weight, grabbing and restraining the gunman's shooting hand with your free hand while repeatedly stabbing him in the neck/chest area with your knife as you both fall to the ground.

It's gruesome, but if you try to see things from your opponent's eyes you'll find better ways to defend against his attacks. You may surprise yourself at just how deceptive and brutal you might be if you were in his shoes defending against a gunman.

Samurai
September 26, 2006, 12:51 PM
Lurper, I really think you're trying to compare apples and oranges, here. You back up your conclusions about the videos being "crap," with the statement, "In the hands of a skilled user, the pistol is much more lethal than the knife outside of contact distance." Noone is arguing that with you. At long range, the pistol will reach where the knife can't. But, you're saying that "it is foolish to believe that a knife is more lethal than a gun at close range." This is simply false!

A 1.5" thick knife makes a bigger hole in the body than a .45" thick bullet. It's that simple! You say, "A bullet is much more likely to incapacitate you faster than a knife. Again, the assumption seems to be 1. that the shooter only gets off 1 shot..." But, your analysis also assumes that the knife assailant only gets off one cut!

You also say, "Additionally, it is equally as hard (I believe harder) to score a[n] incapacitating blow with a knife that with a pistol." Clearly, you have never trained with a bladed weapon. It is NOT difficult at all to access good vascular targets with a knife. And, moreover, with a knife, you have the option of severing muscular connective tissue, thereby incapacitating whole limbs of your target! (Go back and look at the video again. Notice, the knife attacker strikes at the underside of the arm on the gun drawer. This incapacitates the weapon arm, rendering it inoperable!)

Look, I do not doubt your skills as a marksman. I believe that you (like most people on this forum) can probably shoot MUCH straighter than I can. However, it is clear from your posts that you know very little about the physiology of the human body, and exactly what happens to the body when it is gets shot or cut. Your analyses and arguments are seriously flawed.

Art Eatman
September 26, 2006, 03:45 PM
Assuming the proverbial "21-foot" deal as the basis for my nattering: Seems to me that time and awareness are the major factors. If you're looking at a guy when he pulls the knife and simultaneously charges, You might be able to draw from a concealed carry before you're stabbed or cut. Maybe.

If your first knowledge is from the initial "Pad, pad, pad" of his tenny-runners, odds are that you're in deep doo-doo.

About "time": Back before arthritis and lotsa years, I did the IPSC thing. 1981-1983. Before trick holsters and race guns. All primed and ready, I could draw and hit a 7-yard target in right at 0.8 to 0.9 seconds. Chip McCormick was about 0.1 second faster. But that's an open-carry deal, not to mention "all primed and ready". Concealed? Figure at least another couple of tenths, maybe three tenths.

Probably oughta hit the deck with your feet pointed toward Mr. Sharpie, while drawing your favorite Persuader. Call it "Shoes for shields." :)

Art

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 05:42 PM
Heck, I don't know why you waste your time here. With those skills, you should be actually shooting some IDPA and IPSC so that your champion of both. Then you could open your own school.

Friend is a GM by the way.

I took the video to show that NOT getting off the centerline is a bad idea.
Been there done that. Traveled the circuit for several years. Shot for Team Springfield, Dillon, Safariland. Won state championships, shot with the super squad, won stages at the nationals several years but never the whole enchilada. Was one of the first to make Master (before GM existed). I also ran 5 different USPSA clubs, 6 state championships, 1 area championship, so I know just a bit about IPSC.



" Noone is arguing that with you. At long range, the pistol will reach where the knife can't. But, you're saying that "it is foolish to believe that a knife is more lethal than a gun at close range." This is simply false!

Seems to me that the producer of the video is saying exactly that. The producer is trying to convince the viewer that a knife is more lethal at ranges less than 12 feet. People have posted that knives are more lethal at as far as 21 feet. That just isn't true! Some have cited the Tueller drill as proving that when Tueller himself says nothing even remotely resembling that.

You say my logic and analysis is flawed and then make broad sweeping statements that make too many assumptions. The biggest flaw is that you are assuming that the person with the knife can get within striking distance before being shot. I am saying that they cannot. Starting within reach of each other, the playing field is more level, I won't dispute that. You also seem to assume that it is easier for a person skilled with a knife to strike certain points than it is for a pistol. Again it is not. A hand, forearm, jacket will all stop or deflect the blade much more effectively than a bullet.

(Go back and look at the video again. Notice, the knife attacker strikes at the underside of the arm on the gun drawer. This incapacitates the weapon arm, rendering it inoperable!)
Notice that the "officer" stands there like a dummy and lets him do it. He/she makes no attempt to move off the line of attack or block the strike. The video is obviously designed to sell the guy's "knife fighting system". This isn't a police or military training video. It is a commercial knife fighting video targeted at consumers. So to say it has an agenda is an understatement.


However, it is clear from your posts that you know very little about the physiology of the human body, and exactly what happens to the body when it is gets shot or cut.
Yeah, I guess the armed confrontations I have been in and the people I have seen stabbed or shot don't count. Also, the years that I studied Aikido and trained with boken, jo and sword don't count either. Nor I suppose does the training with butterfly knives from my friend who owned a big dojo in D.C..

Again, I won't try to change someone's opinion who is not open to it. But every claim that this video makes to the lethality of a knife at these ranges is easily debunked.

Al Thompson
September 26, 2006, 06:44 PM
Perhaps the video is not quite up to par, but your "resume" seems at vast odds with doctrine from most schools. Knives simply don't jam, don't run out of ammo and action beats reaction. I still think the video shows "what not to do", I.E., stand there and be cut. Where I disagree with you is that the air suckers I've shot with handguns do not react as they do in the movies. I also think your draw times must be based on a stopwatch, not a buzzer and certainly not from a duty rig, let alone a level two or three rig.

At least you didn't use an air soft pistol to demonstrate your skill in your video.

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 07:20 PM
Al,
I can assure you that my times are in fact recorded with a 20 year old competition electronics timer. Really, if you think that those times are tough for a GM, then you need to get out more. From my race rig I can get sub .8 hits all day long at 10 yards. It seems that you want to attack me and my crediblity without any basis. You can go to threat focused forums, here or Brian Enos' forum and read the posts, there are enough people that have checked me out and will tell you that I can do the things I say I can. I don't post with my name because sometimes my personal opinion differs from my professional opinion and I don't want my profession to suffer because of it.

The fact is this: any true GM will be able to get "A" hits from the draw in under a second all day long. Even from the right duty or c.c. rig it is easily done. Rob, Brian, Todd and every other good shooter I know can do it on demand. Watch Burkett's videos.

Frankly, I would hope that my doctrine was different than most schools. Most schools can't don't teach students how to shoot fast. Many still cling to outdated technique and thought like the holy grail. There are a few gems out there, but the rank and file are just average. I am also curious why you feel compelled to attack me when we agree on almost everything. I pointed out that to stand there like a "dummy" was not a smart move. I never said anything about people reacting like they do in the movies. In fact the people I have seen shot, dropped like a sack of potatoes. And in other posts I have also said that action beats reaction. None of these are the issue here. The fact is that at greater than contact distance the knife is at a disadvantage.

I really don't care if you believe my draw times or not. There are thousands of others out there who are just as capable. It's on the video and others that I will post and they can speak for themselves. As I said, trying to alter a closed mind is like talking to a brick.

Art Eatman
September 26, 2006, 07:42 PM
"The biggest flaw is that you are assuming that the person with the knife can get within striking distance before being shot. I am saying that they cannot."

Lurper, I've been following the thread, and while you might well be correct about the video, you made the above statement.

If you're alert and aware and prepared, yeah, could be. But how about the other 95% of the time when you're out in public? Pushing your mother's wheelchair. Holding a child in one arm and with groceries in the other. Holding a heavy door for your wife, who's only part-way through it. Looking at the keyhole on your car door so you can unlock it. Counting your change from buying a paper. Fifty-'leven other examples of common, everyday events that divide one's attention, if not totally divert it from the rest of the world.

After all, many football players do the 40-yard dash in about four and a half seconds. A sixth of that by a guy not wearing all that gear? As I said above, "time".

Just some thoughts...

Art

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 08:13 PM
Thanks Art, you are correct. There are far too many variables to say that either statement is true all of the time. If I came across as believing it was an absolute, I apologize. That was Tueller's whole point. He said that you should be aware of your surroundings so that the person with a knife is not on you before you know it. He also advocates removing your gun from the holster at the first inkling of trouble. If you are ambushed by a knife or a gun, you s**t is weak. But at the distances in this video and in Tuellers, I think the outcome is clear.

BTW if you see Chip, ask him if he remembers the time at the nationals when this chick ran up, jumped on my lap and pulled her shirt over my head. Tell him some guy on the internet told you about it. He should be able to figure it out.

garryc
September 26, 2006, 09:56 PM
BTW if you see Chip, ask him if he remembers the time at the nationals when this chick ran up, jumped on my lap and pulled her shirt over my head. Tell him some guy on the internet told you about it. He should be able to figure it out.

Lurper, I could make so many smarta** cracks right now. I bet that incapacitated you

CobrayCommando
September 26, 2006, 11:00 PM
BTW if you see Chip, ask him if he remembers the time at the nationals when this chick ran up, jumped on my lap and pulled her shirt over my head.

Did you draw your gun to assess the threat or were you caught unawares? She could have had guns built into her tits.

Lurper you should be the one man POTUS security team. You seem very confident that when in aware mode you could detect a threat before it got within 21 feet, much less baby kissing distance, and apparently confident enough to draw your gun on that person in public? :confused:

If you are ambushed by a knife or a gun, you s**t is weak.

In a big city, if someone really wants to kill your ass and they've got half a brain, you're dead. You can't be in condition fuschia every time you go to Trader Joes, where literally dozens of weird looking people are brushing past you.

I just don't believe that you draw on every person that walks towards you with a hand behind their back, or in the pocket of their coat.

Because if you don't then you cannot really criticise someone for being ambushed, all it takes is for them to brush past you, and at the second they pass you stab you in the kidney or liver. It's probably the easiest way to kill someone with a contact weapon.

I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Lurper
September 26, 2006, 11:35 PM
Lurper you should be the one man POTUS security team. You seem very confident that when in aware mode you could detect a threat before it got within 21 feet, much less baby kissing distance, and apparently confident enough to draw your gun on that person in public?
I don't recall saying that in any of the posts. In the video, the officers are aware of the threat. They begin their actions at the same time the assailant does. That is the rhetorical setting for my comments. It is exactly Tueller's point. You need to be aware of how fast the situation can get bad. If a person approaches to contact distance unnoticed and launches their attack, they have a distinct advantage. However, the setting in this video and in Tueller's drill assumes that time starts when the officer is aware of the threat. Tueller sets 2 hits in 1.5 seconds as the standard to achieve to survive an encounter of that type. I was simply pointing out that more than 2 hits in that time frame is possible and that if you were that proficient then the odds are that you would prevail. Again, many people have posted that a knife is more lethal than a gun at as far as 21 feet. That is absurd. I'll be the first to admit that if someone walked up behind me on a crowded street and attacked me without warning, chances are good that I am gonna die. As far as I know, awareness was not the issue I was addressing. It was the abilty to draw and hit an assailant several times before he could close 21 feet (or as in the video, 12 and 6).

Because if you don't then you cannot really criticise someone for being ambushed, all it takes is for them to brush past you, and at the second they pass you stab you in the kidney or liver. It's probably the easiest way to kill someone with a contact weapon.
Never said I did. Never criticized anyone for gettin ambushed. What I said was that the internet ninjas say that if someone with a knife gets within 21 feet of you, you are dead. You can't draw fast enough to hit them, they can kill you with one strike, blah,blah, blah. My reply to that is that it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance.

FWIW, if she did, I would be dead. If I could be killed twice, Chip would have made that happen.

tonerguy
September 27, 2006, 12:05 AM
I've been reading the thread with interest. I competed in the USPSA Nationals 4 times in the mid-1980's and placed in the top 50 twice. I could do all the fast stuff like El Presidente's under 5 seconds, draw and fire 2 good hits at 10 yards in 1.2 seconds. I was competent but not the "ace of the base."

I was anticipating a start signal. I knew it was coming. I suspect my reaction time on the street would be much slower. If I were in condition white I might die with a puzzled look on my face before reacting. I do get complacent or distracted sometimes. Even in a situation where I was aware of my surroundings I'd still have to assess and react.

If I figure an average reaction time into all the numbers being discussed I wouldn't place any bets on any of the outcomes discussed. There are too many variables and unexpected circumstances for me to have much certainty.
Somedays you're the bug on the windshield despite the skills and knowledge.

Ronny
September 27, 2006, 12:10 AM
Starting within reach of each other, the playing field is more level, I won't dispute that. You also seem to assume that it is easier for a person skilled with a knife to strike certain points than it is for a pistol. Again it is not. A hand, forearm, jacket will all stop or deflect the blade much more effectively than a bullet.

Again, here is the mentality that the gunman will be the winner by default because he's an expert IPSC shooter, he carries an STI in a Safariland holster etc etc, and the knifer is complete imbecile.

Unless you go around wearing your IPSC gear waiting for a buzzer to go off, then you're like the rest of us; with a concealed firearm tucked into one or more layers of clothing. In colder climates maybe even three or four. Drawing and firing from such concealment in under a second when a knife is coming at your throat is a fantasy, not reality. Sorry, but dream on. It isn't going to happen. Stuff will go wrong, something will catch, you'll choke, you'll push your wife and child out of the way, and it isn't going to happen the way you trained. IPSC is an "ideal environment" where the cardboard men don't shoot back, nor do they retaliate in any way. They just sit there waiting to get shot.

Also, I don't agree with the statement that:
A hand, forearm, jacket will all stop or deflect the blade much more effectively than a bullet.

It's easy to say that, "oh yeah, i'll just block with my arm and shoot the guy". What's that supposed to mean? -- you're being attacked by a one-armed knifer and you're immune to the physical respone to pain? What do you think he's going to be doing with his free hand? Wave at you?

Forget the incompetent bad guy bliss in which many of you surround yourselves . A skilled knifer will close distance to arms reach, then he will restrain your shooting arm while he stabs you to death. Even if you grab his knife hand, you're at the losing end.

Think on this. If he grabs your shooting hand, all he has to do is keep it pointed elsewhere. If it's a semi-auto and he has it by the slide and you fire it, it will jam. Now you need your other hand to clear the pistol. Oh but wait, your other hand is busy stopping the knife. If you grab his knife hand, all he has to do is twist his wrist to cut yours. Try this at home, grab a kitchen knife and give it someone you trust; then grab them by the arm and say "try and cut me". You will see that there is always a way for them to slice your wrist enough for you to let go no matter how hard you grab their arms, especially if it is held in stabbing form - blade downwards.

I believe that is important to appreciate all aspects of this scenario. Giving the gunman a highly decorated IPSC background and making the knifer a complete idiot accomplishes nothing. Keep an open mind. The way I see it:

A poor shooter vs a good knifer = shooter loses.
A poor knifer vs a good shooter = knifer loses.
A good knifer vs a good shoter = the one who trained to fight against an incompetent oppenent loses.

It's not a matter of pride, but I value force on force training more than a well rehearsed IPSC course of fire... You really can't expect anything unexpected from the latter.

Lurper
September 27, 2006, 01:02 AM
I obviously have too much time on my hands tonight.

Again, here is the mentality that the gunman will be the winner by default because he's an expert IPSC shooter, he carries an STI in a Safariland holster etc etc, and the knifer is complete imbecile.
You said that, I didn't. In fact IPSC never came up in reference to defending against a knife. It was mentioned as a reference to my ability and experience.

I can do it from concealment with and IWB holster under a sport coat. I chose my carry equipment for that reason. I can do it with my Mod. 13, Officer's ACP, S&W 22A and any other gun. More importantly, I practice everyday.

It's easy to say that, "oh yeah, i'll just block with my arm and shoot the guy". What's that supposed to mean? -- you're being attacked by a one-armed knifer and you're immune to the physical respone to pain? What do you think he's going to be doing with his free hand? Wave at you?
No more so than to say what if he grabs your gun hand. Read what I wrote and the context I wrote it in. It is the exact same argument you present except I am arguing it from the other perspective. I don't believe in the what about my free hand, free leg or the Aikido I studied for a decade. That wasn't the point. The point was in the video, the "officers" just stood there.

I believe that is important to appreciate all aspects of this scenario. Giving the gunman a highly decorated IPSC background and making the knifer a complete idiot accomplishes nothing. Keep an open mind.
So, you're saying it's different than making the person with the gun an incompetent boob as in the video. If you read my posts, I said that an experienced person with a knife against an inexperienced shooter will win.
I also advocated an open mind.

I mean, can you really argue the point that this video is not an accurate representation of a gun -v- knife encounter and that the producer has an agenda? If you can then I would say "dream on."

I really mean no offense by asking this, but what is the real issue here? Since we seem to agree on the major points of this argument, I can only guess that you have something against IPSC shooters.

CobrayCommando
September 27, 2006, 02:23 AM
I don't recall saying that in any of the posts. In the video, the officers are aware of the threat. They begin their actions at the same time the assailant does. That is the rhetorical setting for my comments. It is exactly Tueller's point. You need to be aware of how fast the situation can get bad. If a person approaches to contact distance unnoticed and launches their attack, they have a distinct advantage. However, the setting in this video and in Tueller's drill assumes that time starts when the officer is aware of the threat. Tueller sets 2 hits in 1.5 seconds as the standard to achieve to survive an encounter of that type. I was simply pointing out that more than 2 hits in that time frame is possible and that if you were that proficient then the odds are that you would prevail. Again, many people have posted that a knife is more lethal than a gun at as far as 21 feet. That is absurd. I'll be the first to admit that if someone walked up behind me on a crowded street and attacked me without warning, chances are good that I am gonna die. As far as I know, awareness was not the issue I was addressing. It was the abilty to draw and hit an assailant several times before he could close 21 feet (or as in the video, 12 and 6).

Hmm... I guess I was confused because in the video the knifer keeps the knife concealed, yet the pretend officer is clearly aware of whats going to happen. But as you said the drill assumes knowledge of a threat.

As to the issue of knife versus holstered gun at 7 yards, I would have to say I agree with you, that a well trained person with an accessible concealed handgun could do that, and indeed I've seen it simulated (on video).

However all this theoretical crap gets confusing, because what person with a knife in their right mind stands 21 feet away from the person they are assaulting or robbing?! LOL "Hey over there, throw me your wallet!" In reality 50 percent of all law enforcement shootings take place at 5 feet or under (I assume measured from the end of the gun), according to the latest study I saw. In which case the odds really seem to even out more realistically.

Honestly there are so many different complex possible scenarios that it feels futile to discuss these sorts of things. I think the real reason to practice with these drills is to improve reaction time, alertness, dexterity, and familiarity with the weapon of choice. I suppose if the time ever comes when a robber takes out his knife 21 feet away, yells out that he is about to commence an attack, you spin to face him, then wait until he starts sprinting towards you to draw, then this drill will help in a more literal way.

Art Eatman
September 27, 2006, 08:11 AM
:) Next time I'm over to Austintatious...

Art

Samurai
September 27, 2006, 09:06 AM
The shooter in the video behaves as a person who is not in absolute "red alert" at the start of the encounter. The knife is concealed because the shooter isn't supposed to know it's there, hence the lack of "red alert." And, if you are walking around thinking, "well, I've got my gun, and if a guy with a knife comes walking up, I'll just shoot him," then this video is a rude awakening about reaction times.

Lurper, you're really talking out of both sides of your mouth, here. You've made two conflicting statements:

Your first statement is as follows:
"it is foolish to believe that a knife is more lethal than a gun at close range."

Your second statement is:
"I'll be the first to admit that if someone walked up behind me on a crowded street and attacked me without warning, chances are good that I am gonna die."

These statements stand in DIRECT conflict to one another!

To back up your statement that a gun MUST ALWAYS be more lethal than a knife, you say, "it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance." But, this statement (assuming it IS true, which several of the experienced shooters on this site have called into question), it STILL proves NOTHING.

Criminal statistics indicate that close to 90% of all people who get shot live through it. So, your ability to simply dismiss the lethality of a knife by saying "it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance" is a fallacy. To shoot a man once does NOT necessarily mean to kill him. (Here's a bomb to the IPSC and IDPA rulemakers: It does not necessarily mean to "stop" him, either!) (Side note: Not a slam on either organization. I shoot IDPA, and I think it's a wonderful organization.)

Noone is arguing with you that it is perfectly possible to shoot a charging assailant, from ANY distance. Also, noone is arguing with you that a gun can hurt people, and in some cases, kill people. But, you make a very condescending statement: "What I said was that the internet ninjas say that if someone with a knife gets within 21 feet of you, you are dead. You can't draw fast enough to hit them, they can kill you with one strike, blah,blah, blah." And yet, AT THE SAME TIME, you make an equally sweeping statement that the lethality of a knife can be dismissed because, "it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance." So, you hit them! Does that mean that you're gonna be OK?

In fact, the statement that the "internet ninjas" make, "if someone with a knife gets within 21 feet of you, you are dead," is actually quite a valid statement. It's HARD to get away from a charging knife. I've tried it in simulated training, and it's TOUGH. You dismiss it with a flippant attitude, and I think you should lend more credence to the statement behind the video.

I think the video really does say alot. I have NO DOUBT that it was created in an effort to promote SOMEONE'S martial arts training course. HOWEVER, just because it's an advertisement DOES NOT mean that it does not show a VERY VALID point.

Oh, and incidentally, with whom do you train?

Lurper
September 27, 2006, 10:06 AM
Your first statement is as follows:
"it is foolish to believe that a knife is more lethal than a gun at close range."

Your second statement is:
"I'll be the first to admit that if someone walked up behind me on a crowded street and attacked me without warning, chances are good that I am gonna die."

These statements stand in DIRECT conflict to one another!

There is no conflict in these statements. The difference is distance. I pointed out several times that at contact distance the playing field is more level.

To back up your statement that a gun MUST ALWAYS be more lethal than a knife, you say, "it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance." But, this statement (assuming it IS true, which several of the experienced shooters on this site have called into question), it STILL proves NOTHING
Hmmm, don't remember ever saying the gun is ALWAYS more lethal, but okay. You are free to believe what you want, but the fact is there are tons of people who have the ability to hit the assailant before they can close the 21 (12 or 6) feet. What I did point out was that many people post like the knife is going to be instantly fatal and chances are it is not. As a sample of the whole population, there are very few people who are highly skilled with firearms. Of them even fewer skilled enough to meet Tueller's standard. However, that is still an exponentially larger group than those skilled with blades at that level. I have already pointed out that if you pit an expert with a knife against a lesser skilled person with a gun, chances are the knife wins.The big point I was making is that you need to train 'til you reach a certain level of proficiency, train and train some more. I'm sorry if you don't get it or I didn't make myself clear.

To shoot a man once does NOT necessarily mean to kill him.
Didn't say that either. I never said once. In fact I said fire until he stops. Contrary to what you might think, there is a good chance that a couple of hits to the breadbasket will take your attacker's mind off of his intent regardless of lethality. Again, the point was exactly the same as Tueller's, awareness and skill will help you survive. I don't see how you can even argue against it.

Noone is arguing with you that it is perfectly possible to shoot a charging assailant, from ANY distance. Also, noone is arguing with you that a gun can hurt people, and in some cases, kill people. But, you make a very condescending statement: "What I said was that the internet ninjas say that if someone with a knife gets within 21 feet of you, you are dead. You can't draw fast enough to hit them, they can kill you with one strike, blah,blah, blah." And yet, AT THE SAME TIME, you make an equally sweeping statement that the lethality of a knife can be dismissed because, "it is easy to draw and hit someone before they can close the distance." So, you hit them! Does that mean that you're gonna be OK?
You seem to be arguing that point and I really don't believe I said you can dismiss the lethality of a knife. I understand how you may arrive at that conclusion, but that isn't what I meant. Maybe this will help: in order to be lethal, a knife has to touch you. This entails the person with the knife getting close enough to stick it in you. That is where the nuts and bolts are. My point was that you need to identify the threat and neutralize it before they close the distance. That was much more condescending don't you think?
I am really amazed at how you seem to want to attack me personally rather than try to attack my message. Kinda reminds me of the Democrats: can't attack the message, so attack the messenger. I never questioned your ability with a blade, never called you one of the internet ninjas, so I can't understand why feel compelled to attack me personally. That's okay though, I'm a big boy and can handle it.

I think the video really does say alot. I have NO DOUBT that it was created in an effort to promote SOMEONE'S martial arts training course. HOWEVER, just because it's an advertisement DOES NOT mean that it does not show a VERY VALID point.
The video doesn't show a valid point. If it did, it would transpire something like this:
Man with knife walks up to "officer", "officer" minds his/her own damn business, man with knife guts 'officer" like a bluegill and has his way with the dying corpse. The officer's are obviously aware of the threat, otherwise, why would they draw their weapon? It is about as valid as a hollywood production.


Oh, and incidentally, with whom do you train?

To clarify, by train I mean either attended their schools or practiced with on a regular basis. Starting from the beginning:
John Pepper (pepper popper), Ray Chapman, J. Michael Plaxco, John Shaw, Roger Burgess, when I lived in VA Todd Jarret used to come to my house and practice because I had a range in my backyard, after I moved to AZ: Brian Enos, Lyle Wing, Matt Burkett, Rob Leatham. Most of them are friends still.

As I pointed out Samurai, I have btdt on more than one occasion although against guns (and once a hammer), not knives. So unlike other people who post based on what other people tell them, I post based on my experience. Doesn't mean it's gospel, hell, sometimes it my not even be correct! But at least I have the ability to prove my point (with videos, anecdote and fact) and the sense to admit when I am wrong.

Samurai
September 27, 2006, 10:53 AM
I'm not trying to attack you personally, Lurper. I've limited all comments to specific quotes you've posted. And, I disagree with alot of them, and I don't think they are logically supported. I enjoy a spirited debate, and that's all this is. Doesn't mean you're not a perfectly nice person...

In addition to the not-so-good points that I've already responded to, you've also made some good points.

1. Yes. You can improve your chances of surviving an attack like this by training and becoming proficient. Training and proficiency are both very important.

2. When you're using a weapon, DISTANCE IS EVERYTHING. Distance, in this scenario, means the difference between life and death (for EITHER attacker).

These are good points. And, I'm sorry if I've stepped on your feelings. But, I simply have less faith in my gun to stop an attack, I guess. And, I've seen what a knife can do, and it's awe-inspiring to see the large amount of destruction in such a short amount of time. Knives are quick, deadly little buggers, and it's folley for a person to have too much faith in their weapon, trusting it to be able to stop an attack.

This "gun vs. knife" debate has gone on WAY before you and I started this rant, and it will continue to go on WAY after we stop. The REAL issue here is, different people think about this scenario different ways, and NOBODY knows for sure who is right about it.

I'm gonna stop now. Both our positions have been belabored for long enough...

Lurper
September 27, 2006, 11:12 AM
Good, I am glad. I also second everything in your last post.

Ian2005
September 27, 2006, 12:41 PM
When I saw the video, I thought it wa an ad for Krav Maga... maybe I missed something.

Ronny
September 27, 2006, 12:55 PM
I really mean no offense by asking this, but what is the real issue here? Since we seem to agree on the major points of this argument, I can only guess that you have something against IPSC shooters.

No offense taken, and we do agree on the major points to an extent. One area in which we differ is that I'm trying to look at this situation from an ordinary person carrying concealed who is hampered by clothing, family, grocery bags and the like.

The issue hasn't changed; it's still gun vs knife. My take on it, however, is from a day to day perspective, with the wife and kids on one arm and shopping bags in the other. How I respond to a sudden knife attack in this situation is more important than how fast I can draw and fire at a cardboard target from an open carry rig. Looking at it this way, to me, is more wholesome, and more representative of what you will encounter in life.

Contrary to what you're guessing, I have deep respect for IPSC/IDPA shooters. But I do not subscribe to the notion that what you learn from competition shooting is purely representative of how you will react in real life. I guess that's because I haven't gotten to the point where instead of people walking around me, I see white and brown, shoot and no-shoot, cardboard cut-outs :D

garryc
September 28, 2006, 10:44 AM
No offense taken, and we do agree on the major points to an extent. One area in which we differ is that I'm trying to look at this situation from an ordinary person carrying concealed who is hampered by clothing, family, grocery bags and the like.

I think it's reasonable to believe that if the average Joe hasn't mastered his gun then he is even less experianced with a knife. So for that guy, which constitutes at least 95% of the CCW holders, a knife is useless. Time spend in other than firearm training should first be USD consentrating on blocks and evasions. Knife training is an extenuation of USD, kind of like advanced training.

AKhunter
October 5, 2006, 10:37 AM
I noticed that there was a source that wasn't mentioned here: http://www.dogbrothers.com There is a preview of a video done with Gabe Suarez, the firearms instructor, that shows some scenario training of gun v. knife. It's pretty compelling stuff, imo. The video is called "Die less often." I've only seen the promo, but it's on my xmas list already. The promo is about 7 minutes long and is pretty graphic in places.

AK

AKhunter
October 5, 2006, 10:47 AM
My bad, I noticed through further reading that the video I mentioned is also mentioned in the knife fighting thread, however, as it didn't generate any discussion, I still put it out there for you. The promo is very worth watching, regardless.

AK

threegun
October 9, 2006, 12:23 PM
Samurai, The bottom line is if your Grand Master attempted the same maneuver as in the video against an equally trained pistol grand master (like say LURPER) the outcome would be different. I think that is what Lurper is saying. We all understand that the edged weapon is deadly as is the firearm. The difference is that with one system you must be at contact distances. One system can't easily cause an instant stop the other can. One system can be blocked or defensed, empty handed, by an equally trained foe the other cannot. Clearly for offense or defense the knife is inferior to the gun. The Samurai became extinct with the advent of gun powder for a reason. The American Indians can attest to the inferiority of knives and bows, besides the fact that they lost, every time they could get a gun they did.

BTW, If your GM is telling you that you should bring a knife to a gun fight he is a fool. If he is making you deadly with the knife but knowledgeable about its limitations great.