The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 16, 2010, 09:21 PM   #26
DT Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 4, 2001
Posts: 954
Quote:
As this is a firearms related forum, I state rule # 1 "have a gun, almost any gun will do." Though I carry a knife most every day, I subscribe to the thought of NEVER BRING A KNIFE TO A GUNFIGHT!
Do some close range force-on-force with a good knifer and you'll see why they usually say, 'don't take a gun to a knife fight.'

Larry
__________________
He who fights and runs away had better run pretty damn fast.

Government, Anarchy and Chaos
DT Guy is offline  
Old February 16, 2010, 10:40 PM   #27
KenpoTex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2009
Location: SW Missouri
Posts: 215
Quote:
Do some close range force-on-force with a good knifer and you'll see why they usually say, 'don't take a gun to a knife fight.'
Thank you.
__________________
"Either you are the weapon and your gun is a tool, or your gun is the weapon and you are a tool."

Matt K.
KenpoTex is offline  
Old February 17, 2010, 10:50 AM   #28
Cremon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by DT-Guy
Do some close range force-on-force with a good knifer and you'll see why they usually say, 'don't take a gun to a knife fight.
I agree if the person with the knife is close to you (and they WILL have to get close to you to have that advantage). In order for that to work they have to either know or suspect that you have a gun (if they KNOW you have one, it's likely they'd avoid the confrontation because most people with a knife won't go after someone who they know has a gun unless they are 100% sure about the outcome - I don't care how good you think you are with one).

I personally would not try to draw my gun if I was being mugged by someone right on top of me with a knife but I WILL if he is not right on top of me - and I will shoot immediately without a word. I am too old for any more arse kickings and a knife is a deadly weapon - that one is easy.
__________________
If guns were outlawed, then only outlaws would have guns.
Cremon is offline  
Old February 17, 2010, 10:53 AM   #29
The Great Mahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 3, 2008
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 1,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenpoTex
great mahoo & rburch,

fair enough...As I said, I really don't see the advantage. I think it is more likely that you will inflict meaningful damage with a thrust rather than a cut/slash (and you can always thrust in and rip out for more damage).
Since karambits are all but worthless for thrusting, I feel that they give up too much.
Of course, I also don't really buy into the "bio-mechanical cutting" a.k.a. "defanging the snake" thing that is so often touted by many blade practitioners.

To each their own though...
Again, it really depends on one's fighting style. Thrusting is typically considered to be the fastest way to stop an opponent, since with slashing you have to wait for them to bleed out, during which time they might continue to fight; with a pierce to a major organ or nerve conduit, they are quickly incapacitated. However, it can be much easier to land slashes than a precision pierce, not to mention having the appropriate force to penetrate the body's protection of such vital areas.

But don't discount a good slashing attack. The Karambit in particular is designed to bite in, terring flesh with quick swipes to typically accessable areas in a close-fight. It is very easy to sever the femoral or brachial arteries with a quick attack, either of which will result in extreme blood loss and incapacitation or death in moments without immediate treatment. Keep in mind the tearing of muscles and tendons, which can disable limbs and one's ability to fight without inflicting death to the aggressor (though persisting legal troubles would be likely ).

Please note that I understand knife techniques and have some training with them, but by no means would I consider myself a knife fighter. I do, however, recognize that a knife is a better option in some cases than a gun, especially in crowded areas where a stray shot or over-pen could result in accidental killing of non-involved.
__________________
“There are three reasons to own a gun. To protect yourself and your family, to hunt dangerous and delicious animals, and to keep the King of England out of your face.” - Krusty the Clown
The Great Mahoo is offline  
Old February 19, 2010, 08:53 AM   #30
DT Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 4, 2001
Posts: 954
Quote:
I agree if the person with the knife is close to you (and they WILL have to get close to you to have that advantage). In order for that to work they have to either know or suspect that you have a gun (if they KNOW you have one, it's likely they'd avoid the confrontation because most people with a knife won't go after someone who they know has a gun unless they are 100% sure about the outcome - I don't care how good you think you are with one).

I personally would not try to draw my gun if I was being mugged by someone right on top of me with a knife but I WILL if he is not right on top of me - and I will shoot immediately without a word. I am too old for any more arse kickings and a knife is a deadly weapon - that one is easy.
I understand your opinion-and I shared it until my first encounter with a really good knifer. Do a bit of research into things like the Tueller drill (sp?) and get a chance to watch 'Surviving Edged Weapon Attacks' by Caliber Press. You'll realize that you won't see the knife before you feel the knife, if there's any skill involved.

Again, force on force is where you can prove this to yourself. You could also take a look at this LINK to see some of the problems with facing a knife with a gun.

Larry
__________________
He who fights and runs away had better run pretty damn fast.

Government, Anarchy and Chaos
DT Guy is offline  
Old February 19, 2010, 09:35 AM   #31
Cremon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 307
DT_Guy - I understand your position but I am as good at fighting with a knife as I am at building starships, hehe. So my opinion comes from the odds I face.

If I use a knife to fight a guy with a knife who knows how to use it there is a 99% chance I will end up face down on the concrete. I can tell you that the odds will be much better if I use my S&W 4516. That is why I carry a gun instead of a knife, and why I'll use a gun against a guy with a knife instead of a knife. For me the math is very easy.
__________________
If guns were outlawed, then only outlaws would have guns.
Cremon is offline  
Old February 19, 2010, 11:04 AM   #32
AcridSaint
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2009
Posts: 407
Sorry, that was the wrong thread.
AcridSaint is offline  
Old February 20, 2010, 02:55 PM   #33
_Muad'dib_
Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2009
Posts: 68
I've thought alot about both styles but don't have any experience training with either. I have spent a short amount of time learning some basics in Escrima and also a short bit of time in Krav Maga.

I want someone to critique my ideas about both styles. I guess that straight blade is much better if you have a chance to draw before you are attacked. You will then have a chance to keep your attacker at bay. Straight blades definitely have the advantage in thrusting. And thrusting provides the largest vital target areas. My thoughts though would be that even if you do get a stab into an attackers chest/stomach, etc, it won't actually stop their attack. And if they have a weapon themselves, stopping the attack has got to be one of the most critical aspects of our defense. In Krav Maga we were taught to disable the attacker as quickly as possible. By just thrusting with a straight blade I'm wondering how quickly you can actually stop the attack. With a karambit it would seem that your attacks have much more force and stopping power by severing the working muscles and tendons of an attacker. And I personally think that disabling him will lead to a quicker victory by ourselves than a stab that can take some time to bleed out. I've shot deer with a bow and even after a shot through a lung and into the liver the deer was able to run over a quarter of a mile. Though deer may have a bit more endurance after such a wound than we would, surely there is a lesson to be learned. And if you take into account that fact that with adrenaline/drugs/alcohol in someone's system numbing the pain, a thrust into their chest could still be a bit of a waiting game for them to bleed out.

Obviously you could use a straight blade to disable an attacker but I think you're ability to strike with force and power would be greatly diminished as compared to a karambit. In my mind it comes down to which style has more stopping power. If you compare it to handguns, you could say that a .22 through the vitals will stop someone just like a .45. But one of them will stop them much sooner. BUT, I've had no experience with knife training other than a bit of defense in Krav Maga so I'm just talking out my thoughts. Just mall ninjaing it up Feel free to correct me.
_Muad'dib_ is offline  
Old February 20, 2010, 04:45 PM   #34
AcridSaint
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2009
Posts: 407
If you keep your knife sharp, it will not require power for most cuts. A straight blade can cut tendons just as easily as a hooked blade. You can use all of the motions that a kerambit users except for a straight punching stab, which is not something I favor anyhow.

One might feel that the kerambit gives you an edge up close - perhaps it will. But, for me, the goal of every fight is to get away and that means keeping distance. Cut yourself free and start scanning the area, now if there's a second scumbag what do you have to keep him out of contact distance?
AcridSaint is offline  
Old February 22, 2010, 09:43 PM   #35
Erik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: America
Posts: 3,479
Tactical advantages? None. That is not to say that if one is versed in styles suited to the use of karambits that one could not get the job done.
__________________
Meriam Webster's: Main Entry: ci·vil·ian Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\, Function: noun, Date: 14th century, 1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law, 2 a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force b: outsider 1, — civilian adjective
Erik is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.04884 seconds with 8 queries