Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Yanlin]

People! Stop this debate about wrist grabbing and bones!

Put yourself as the ATTACKER. Not the guy defending himself!

Are you SERIOUSLY gonna stand close to somebody when you have a gun? Are you gonna LET HIM come close? NO! You SHOOT HIM!

You can't do that with a knife.

CASE CLOSED.

Don't start about how to kidnap. Then it's just a fight of skill. There is a skill to holding a person just like there is a skill to escaping a hold. SHEESH!

With a knife, you have to be close. From my research, the whole body is involved in a fight. Not just the parts holding the weapon! I have a BODY FFS! If somebody tries to grab me, I'll probably MOVE or TWIST or something. Or use the grab against them! Especially since I have TWO HANDS! He can't grab both my hands and kick me. He'd be equally immobilized and I'd be in a key position to MANHAUL his ass!

Now of course it's easy to grab a gun. I can still shoot the gun, can't I? All I have to do is react to his movements.

When I'll say "Don't move or I'll shoot." I'll fucking mean it. He moves, he gets shot. Can't do that with a knife. With a knife, he gets a chance to counterattack.

Now stop this senseless debate. Guns are far more lethal than knives. But you try to beat this by giving the knife wielder skill while you leave the gunman in a hopeless position!

Let's assume both attackers are equally skilled with their weapon. A trained gunman would NEVER close the distance between him and the target. A skilled knife wielder will close the distance and proceed to use normal martial arts. Usually something based of Krav Maga.

But with a gun, you don't place yourself at risk.

END OF DEBATE. Guns have RANGE. Knives don't. Throwing doesn't count. Throwing can be dodged and predicted. He'd also lose his knife.



Wrist: If you grab my knife holding wrist or gun holding wrist, odds are I'll swing it in position to make the knife stab you. It is not that hard. You can't make my wrist immobile. No matter how hard you hold. Unless you break the bones.

Now remember. Best way to not get hurt is to run away. Can't do that with a gun. He'll just shoot you. But you can do it with a knife.



End of discussion. Guns are more lethal than knives if used properly. You can't give one condition where the knife is superior and say they are superior in ALL cases.

How about a gunman vs a knifeman? The knifeman is FUCKED.



Can we stop this senseless debate now?

[Neonivek]

Bad form Yanlin. This was a fun debate with little-no flaming and you go all "Everyone put down your guns" while everyone is unarmed.

[mainiac]

Breaking grabs and holds while standing is a matter of technique not power.

As someone who did high school wrestling, I can tell you this statement is correct.  I can also tell you that I have no freaking clue what you are talking about saying it's easy.  In order to break a wrist hold from standing you need to significantly reposition your body, use a second hand or straight up overpower someone.  That's less of a victim helpless and more of an uncertain contest.

And all of this is assuming of course that the victim doesn't see then knife and run...  You can out run a person with a knife.  Ever seen someone outrun a bullet?

[Neonivek]

Superman. He is faster then a speeding bullet.

On a side note: You don't have to break their grip. You could just break their arm, face, or ribs.

[Yanlin]

Bad form Yanlin. This was a fun debate with little-no flaming and you go all "Everyone put down your guns" while everyone is unarmed.

I'm sorry. I just got a little pissed about how anyone can doubt the lethality of guns and preach that to others. Because I know that eventually, a bunch of people will believe him. Eventually, one of those believers will be attacked with a gun and will get killed or seriously hurt. Underestimating a threat is lethal. Overestimating a threat is not.

It is because of that off chance for one person to get hurt from the misinformation that I can prevent.

So that's exactly what I tried to do. Prevent it.

I'm sorry.

[Neonivek]

Naw I am sure they are just saying that guns are much easier to disarm then Knives

I don't think anyone here assumes they can lay a hand on someone a few feet away faster then the other can move their finger slightly

[Ciarog]

Was I involved in this argument?

Um, any Johny Cash fans here?

[mainiac]

Naw I am sure they are just saying that guns are much easier to disarm then Knives

I don't think anyone here assumes they can lay a hand on someone a few feet away faster then the other can move their finger slightly

Really?  Because that's the exact idea I was laboring under.

[Rezan]

You can only disarm a person holding a gun when he has yet to decide to pull the trigger. If somebody's actively trying to shoot you, even an experienced commando would have trouble.

Basically the concept is how "active" a weapon is. Any active weapon is always dangerous to disarm. A knife is always active in someone's hand, thus it is always dangerous to disarm. A gun is only ever active when the holder has decided to pull the trigger.

No one is questioning the lethality of a rapidly moving lead projectile.

And Ciarog; God's Gonna Cut You Down? :f

[mainiac]

Rezan, the most basic rule of gun safety is that there is no such thing as an "inactive" gun.  A gun can go off at ANY time.  Safeties fail, empty chambers miraculously turn out to be full and people pull triggers they don't mean to!

My grandfather told me once about one of the guard posts at Gitmo bay that he used to man while in the marines.  At the end of every watch he would empty his sidearm.  Then he would point it at the ceiling (which was thick concrete) and pull the trigger on the gun he'd emptied.  The ceiling was scattered with bullet holes from "empty" sidearms from years of marines manning that post.

Gun safety is not absolutes, it's odds.  Not even disciplined marines at the highest security station in American history (this was during the Cuban Missile Crisis) could make a gun safe.

Hundreds of people die each year from gun accidents or robberies where the robber didn't intend to kill anyone.  There's a million different things that could go wrong, and WAY too many of them end up with someone being dead.

So please, please, please, do not give that cavalier bullshit about someone not wanting to pull a trigger.  It's a dangerous attitude.  There is no such thing as a safe gun.  There's only guns that are less dangerous.  And a gun in the hands of some one you are antagonizing is a VERY dangerous gun indeed.

Military personal, who have a smaller chance of surviving kidnapping and a larger chance of disarming an adversary, have different odds to weigh.  But the advice you give is a DANGER to anyone else.

[Neonivek]

An interesting statistic came up once that I am not sure if it is true.

On threat of gunpoint people have a higher chance of survival running away then they do getting kidnapped.

It is unfortunate that kidnappings have such low survival rates. If I were to guess why: It is because people kidnap others for a large part so that they can kill them in a safe area and dispose their bodies there as well.

Which is what makes the statistic make sense... then again a lot of things make perfect sense but arn't true.

[mainiac]

Kidnappings have a low survival rate?  Citation needed.

[Neonivek]

Kidnappings have a low survival rate?  Citation needed.

It could be "Kidnapping at gunpoint" having low survival rate. Though I would be hopeless to attempt to find it.

[mainiac]

So... it's an assumption being passed off as known fact?

[beorn080]

Ya know, I really need to figure out what we are arguing. I was saying that in attempting to kidnap someone, you have to be close behind them, otherwise it is "fairly" simple to try to escape around a corner, regardless of what weapon the attacker is using. If the person is attempting to kidnap with a gun, there are techniques that can be used to disarm the attacker, IF THEY ARE CLOSE. With a knife, it is much harder to disarm it, but there is the caveat that it is conversely easier to run.

Mainac: By active we mean deadly. A handgun has 15 instances ,typically, of deadliness along a straight line from the barrel of the gun, therefore it has a limited activeness. A knife is always deadly, albeit at shortrange only, and is therefore always active. Yes gun safety dictates that a gun is always dangerous. Knife safety dictates the same thing.

I am not giving any advice. I have stated no techniques for disarmament, I briefly mentioned two basic wrist escapes, and have merely stated that there are methods for disarming an attacker who is at close range behind you. Not close range at a couple of feet, close range with the gun in your back. I would never attempt to teach any specific self defense techniques over the internet. So please don't claim that I am giving advice that will get people killed, because I haven't.

Yanlin: Guns are lethal. So are knives. I never said any different. I was merely stating that YOU seem to disregard knives as being lethal. I stated that knives are harder to disarm, which you don't seem to be able to disprove. You also say you can outrun a knife user. Maybe, if your fairly fast and they aren't. If they can run faster or for a longer time then you you can't.

And your little gunman vs knifeman argument. You just did the same thing you accused us of doing, making a single situation blanket for all situations. You didn't even specify ranges or if the opponents were aware of one another. A gun doesn't do much good if your grappling, at least compared to the damage a knife can do.

Listen, guns and knives are EQUALLY lethal. At different ranges and in different situations, they have different uses. Guns run out of ammo, can jam though unlikely, are noisy, heavy, and have no utilitarian purpose. Knives are silent, never jam, never run out of ammo, lightish, and have many utilitarian purposes that make them easier to explain away. They have different ranges and properties, but both are deadly.