I am a fan of a good knife. Right now I am fixing to get a bowie knife manufactured by a company called SOG. It's a stainless (AUS-8 type), rather than the high-carbon types which some guys prefer, but I like my knives to last without having to worry about polishing and care. It's a beauty, and from what I can tell it seems like a high quality piece for a decent price. But I am a frugal bastard so I will save it as a birthday present to myself or for some special occasion which will give me a justifiable excuse to spend for it.

I've read some of the many posts regarding the great debate we have been having recently on gun control. Good points, for and against. But I think there was something missing to the argument, and that is the fact that knives are much more versatile and better to possess overall than guns. I mean, you can use it for many, many purposes, including camping and wilderness trekking, or for carving wood, or using it as a make-shift all-purpose tool, for self-defense, or just simply for cutting things. And they are convenient to carry on your person.

Obviously, guns are much more powerful for the very limited purpose for which they are used. But, dollar for dollar, and for variety of purposes, anyone else think that knives are better than guns overall? For hobby or collecting purposes anyway.    

 

Views: 2316

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Well, as they say, don't bring a gun to a knife fight. 

Actually, you have it backwards.... Knives are weapons of last resort.

A knife is better for cutting things. A gun is better for killing things.

There is no such thing as a single solution for all problems, so yes, logically, a knife is better than a gun in certain circumstances, and vice-versa.

 

I'd like to see you construct a proper argument supporting your assertion.

For hobby or collecting purposes there is just one thing that matters, and that is how much you like it. 

Knives make great tools and lousy weapons. With a knife, you have to have the strength, agility and skill to make it work, and you have to get up close and personal with your assailant. If he's a couple of feet away you are no threat. If you bring the knife in close, you might be supplying a deadly weapon to someone more fit to use it. 

Even then, I daresay that in your country (wherever legal) a guy carrying a concealed gun looks much more sane than a guy with a 6.4" fixed blade strapped to his belt unless he is indeed out hunting or something. 

Usually you need a knife often, and a small one will do. But you don't ever need a gun until you need one badly. 

I like knives more than guns. I use a knife everyday. 

Knives are more useful to me on a day to day basis. I need to open boxes, cut food, etc. 

From a self-defense standpoint... within 10-15 feet, they are pretty handy, but beyond that, someone with a gun has more than enough time to make you irrelevant. 

AUS-8 is a decent steel. I'm not a big fan of bowie knives though. Blade heavy, to thick to use for skinning, wrong shape to use for fighting, too big to conceal. :/ Sog makes decent blades though, in general. Enjoy. 

10 to 15 ft? That's some reach you have! 

Mythbusters did an entertaining segment. A man charging with a knife vs. a man drawing a gun. Consistently, the knife wielding man could stab the gunslinger first, within about 15 feet. Obviously, adjust situationally and YMMV. But they are far from useless. 

Ultimately, for me it is irrelevant. Guns are illegal for me to carry in the city. So I carry my knives. 

 In law enforcement they call that the 30 foot or 20 foot rule, depending on how paranoid your instructor is. I was lucky enough to get some training in it. A good few of us were able to clear leather and "fire" with that orange rubber gun, but the excercise was both to show us to be wary, as well as to use defensive tactics to protect you while drawing.

   Whether or not a pistoleer can engage before someone with a blade gets on him has much to do with holster options.  The more retention devices you have, or worse, having to draw from a iwb, the more danger you're in from a sudden encounter.

 

That Mythbusters segment wasn't really about knives for self-defense, though.  It was more about knife as an offensive weapon ... or, at best, a dueling weapon.  According to that test ... if you're close enough and have a knife in your hand, you can get the drop on a guy with a holstered gun so long as you surprise him, sprint, and stab him.

 

If you have a knife in a sheath -- or, worse, folded in your pocket -- good luck with that.  You probably won't draw faster than a guy with a holstered gun.  If the guy with the gun is the aggressor -- thus already drawn -- he'll shoot you ten times before you get the knife out.


JB

I don't disagree. It's more the assumption that the knife useless against a gun at all, that I'm arguing with. 

But as with someone who trains to use their gun for self defense, you train with your knife too. A knife I use for self defense is a different beast than the folder in the bottom of my pocket with my keys. And, as I said - for me, it's irrelevant. I cannot legally carry a gun (and likely wouldn't at this point anyway). I would never suggest a knife is superior to a gun for self defense, but it's far from useless. 

If the guy with the gun is the aggressor -- thus already drawn -- he'll shoot you ten times before you get the knife out.

That's usually true of your gun too. 

There is almost always a tactical advantage to the aggressor.  He has the element of surprise.

 

If its a robbery or carjacking or whatever, and he doesn't know you have a weapon, you can take back the element of surprise.  If he just wants to shoot somebody ... you've got a better chance if you're not first.


JB

RSS

Latest Activity

Joshua Wolf replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"I think they would offer skills I'm looking to introduce but not necessarily the structure I'm looking to create."
4 minutes ago
Joshua Wolf replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"Hi Will, I'm not talking about orders not accepting young men. I'm talking about the reasons for young men not joining. There is little for them in most of these organizations, hence why they don't have many young people in these…"
12 minutes ago
Will replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"AFAIK, every fraternal order accepts young men.  Knights of Columbus accepts starting at age 18.  Freemasons, it's 18 or 21.  Elks and Moose, 21.  Oddfellows, 16.  Rotary, 18.  You have plenty of options."
24 minutes ago
Joshua Wolf replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"What other organization\fraternal orders? I agree fraternal orders exist and serve some of the purposes I describe, but not for young men.  "
29 minutes ago
Sean commented on Max's photo
Thumbnail

I made this

"I see what looks like maple, oak, purple heart, black walnut and possibly mahogany. Is the centre zebrawood or some kind of rosewood? At any rate, good work. Post more photos of your work as they come along."
45 minutes ago
Duke Braeden the Lionhearted replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"Historical reenacting, especially medieval might be up your alley"
50 minutes ago
Joshua Wolf replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"The focus is on personal development and community building "
53 minutes ago
Joshua Wolf replied to Joshua Wolf's discussion Fraternal orders for young men?
"Hey Shane, I believe your right as much as a group of people who have an interest in old timey stuff. What I am going for here is more of a shift to a less virtual and tech based world, giving young men a break from this and hopefully a new-found…"
56 minutes ago

© 2014   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service