I thought it was just the Brits who were afraid of knives
The FBI and Metro police are warning their officers about some dangerous weapons after an unusually perilous year for knife attacks.
In this era of gun control, there is renewed concern about knives, especially concealed weapons that are disguised as normal items.
This FBI recently sent out a bulletin across the country that indicates even a blade less than three inches long can produce a fatal stab injury.
A brief interlude on knife fighting: you don’t stab, you cut. It’s easier for the recipient of said wound to fight back if they’re just plugging a hole than it is for them to fight back if they’re trying to hold their insides in.
More:
Authorities recently have found people carrying a knife that was described as a lipstick case, a gun hidden in a radio, a stun gun in a flashlight and even a gun concealed in a knife.
According to Metro statistics, there were 270 knife attacks in Nashville in 2005. So far this year, there have already been 293 knife attacks.
Wow, I guess knives are getting popular. And my favorite:
A weapon that is generating much of the concern is a tactical knife that is often described as the perfect pocketknife since it is perfectly legal and easily worn on the hip.
Yes, folks, assault knives!
The FBI is concerned because the blade easily flips out and can be used to attack an unsuspecting individual.
Residents who carry regular pocket knives do not need to be concerned by the new bulletin. Only knife blades that are longer than four inches are against the law to carry.
I happen to have a knife that flips out easily but the blade is only 3 or so inches long. It’s similar to this one but you can buy it at Wal-Mart for about $30. I didn’t know it was tactical. I guess tactical is a synonym for convenient.
August 1st, 2006 at 8:35 am
No, youre wrong about knife fighting. Cutting strokes are rarely fatal, the only exception being if they sever a limb or cut into the neck arteries. Pretty much all the major arteries, nerves and important organs are inside the body and must be reached by stabbing. The insides are held in very firmly by membranes and connective tissue and you will have a profoundly difficult time disembowling someone who can fight back.
This was an important reason why the Roman legions were so effective in combat. They discovered how quickly fatal even a relatively shallow puncture wound could be and used it to great effect against armies who did not know this and kept using slashing and hacking strokes.
Then again, it is also easier to make a weapon of low grade steel that can kill by puncture than one that can kill by slashing.
August 1st, 2006 at 8:39 am
Well, i’m speaking more in terms of stopping an attack than killing. And my info is based on sooper seekrit but reliable sources.
August 1st, 2006 at 8:47 am
So is my info. Look at the ballistic wounds that stop an attack. A prime example of ineffectiveness is a birdshot wound- lots of surface damage (like a long knife slice) but no serious nerve damage and relatively little blood pressure drop. All the effective fight stoppers reach inside the body and sever major arteries and nerves. This is just as true of edged weapons as it is with projectiles.
All the blood vessels on the surface of the body are capillaries and all the nerves are serving only that section of the body. Inflicting an incapacitating wound by damaging the outer surface of the body is notoriously ineffective at stopping a fight.
August 1st, 2006 at 9:46 am
Check out the new US Knife & Tool Association – http://www.uskta.org
It’s intended to be the ‘knife’ equivalent of the NRA.
August 1st, 2006 at 9:54 am
Well, they should ban them!
Worked in Sctoland, didn’t it?
As for knife fights, bring a gun to one and you’ll be OK. =)
August 1st, 2006 at 11:44 am
The WSJ was in on the act earlier. It sounds like this is the first wave of an assault on the carrying knives and other tools. Just last month we laughed at the silliness about knives coming out of Great Britain.
My post here links to the WSJ article posted at the high road.
August 1st, 2006 at 11:50 am
And my info is based on sooper seekrit but reliable sources.
lmao
August 1st, 2006 at 12:36 pm
As always, location, location, location.
A slice wound tends to be faster and more likely to disable, particularly since even short knifes can get a decent tendon cut on the arms (which are also more exposed). Slices are also generally much more painful, at least until you start poking into internal organs.
But stab wounds have their place. A stab to the sternum is much more damaging than any slice to the chest would be with the same weapon. Stabs commit much more momentum, and are best aimed at normally well-guarded points of the torso and limbs. But they’re more likely to end a fight as opposed to just slowing down your enemy (admittedly, slowing down an enemy has its place : lets you run away). A stab will easily hit kidneys or arteries when a slice would only cut skin or muscle. There’s a reason the Fairbairn-Sykes knife, used by the OSS and Marine Raiders through WWII, was a great stabbing instrument.
Part depends on your grip : the “cancer” grip (modified forward grip with thumb pointing forward at targets) is useless for anything but stabbing, while most reverse grips will overcommit you if you attempt to stab with them.
Of course, if your opponent has a weapon himself, all of the above goes out the window. In a weapon to weapon fight, you should first attempt to cause a minor wound then run, but if that’s not possible, you should leave every possibility and technique open. The only bad cut when someone’s trying to kill you is one on your own body.
August 1st, 2006 at 1:44 pm
The FBI is concerned because the blade easily flips out and can be used to attack an unsuspecting individual.
Oh, no! I’ve got hands that can easily flip out and be used to attack an unsuspecting individual! Knife hand, ridge hand, spear hand, punch, backfist, hammerfist, and oh wow that’s just a few! God help us all, we’ve all got Assault Hands! We must make them illegal!
August 1st, 2006 at 1:53 pm
Knives (and guns) are only “tactical” and “assault” weapons if they have scary black handles. Wood is for “legitimate” use 🙂
August 1st, 2006 at 2:53 pm
I’m with Uncle on the cutting rather than stabbing. I’m not sure why people think cuts can only be shallow and won’t reach vital places. I suppose it’s possible that stabs go deeper, but if you’re cut isn’t deep enough to kill, you’re doing it wrong. ;0
Among the shallow areas that can be attacked with a knife are the jugular, thyroid, femoral artery, iliac artery, brachial plexus, and intestines. Get any of those and your attacker doesn’t have long. Even a well-muscled fat guy has all those relatively close to the surface.
If your knife is sharp and you use it well, you can slash through just about anything. A friend of mine is an instructor in a martial art that is primarily knife-based. He recently did a series of tests using dummies swaddled in thick clothes and demonstrated that knives go right through with a slashing motion. He attacked large cuts of meat as well to show how deep he cut. Even went through bone pretty well. He did it with large and small knives.
Bottom line is that gashes are much bigger wounds than stabs. Poke a guy and he’ll keep coming. Leave bits of him hanging and he’ll be too busy trying to scoop his innards back in to kill you.
August 1st, 2006 at 3:29 pm
Everything I’ve read is that stabbing is more effective. You can do lots of nasty damage with slices, but it’s too hard to get to anything vital with a short blade.
August 1st, 2006 at 5:47 pm
Dont you think it is rather disturbing that there are 12 comments regarding which method is better: Cutting or Stabbing? 🙂
August 1st, 2006 at 10:10 pm
And nary a word about slicing…
Seriously, I’d say they serve different functions. Slashing is likely to end an endable fight sooner, and with less legal complications. I taught my son, who shaves with and carries a straight razor, something I learned in seventh grade. Open up an eyebrow.