Folder v/s Fixed

[Tirod]

Any knife for self defense requires a skill set of martial arts in depth first. If the user cannot successfully defend themselves in bare hand combatives, disarms, and reverses, they won't even be able to reach for their own knife. Besides, the opponent has graciously offered his, it's simply a matter of taking it.

If that sounds like a nearly impossible task, then carrying one in defense will be. The mindset and skill level are seeing something beyond their ability. Fix that first. On the journey to becoming accomplished in self defense, it will be discovered that the knife has offsetting disadvantages. They do exist - and are the historical motivations in invent handguns to improve on them.

In this day and age of more than 40 states with "shall issue" concealed carry, use of a knife as a weapon is now relegated to those who can't carry a gun. Whether it's the expense, or the legality is rather moot - guns can be had pretty cheap, less than a lot of knives. The Ruger LCP retails for $280, the Sebenza $350. And for the really cheap end, the "Jennings" pistols are still out on the gun show tables. They can function well enough for one shot.

The cute scene of Indy Jones pulling out his revolver in frustration at the sword wielding assailant was more than just some goofing around on the movie set left in by the editor. It's a statement of those skilled in superior weapons and why they are preferred. Don't fall into the fantasy trap that carrying a big knife will help much. Attackers do exactly that, come unexpectedly and from an ambush to prevent any response at all. Practice skills to resist that before even considering what weapon might be appropriate, and most of the problem is solved.

 

[robinkevin]

Any knife for self defense requires a skill set of martial arts in depth first. If the user cannot successfully defend themselves in bare hand combatives, disarms, and reverses, they won't even be able to reach for their own knife. Besides, the opponent has graciously offered his, it's simply a matter of taking it.

If that sounds like a nearly impossible task, then carrying one in defense will be. The mindset and skill level are seeing something beyond their ability. Fix that first. On the journey to becoming accomplished in self defense, it will be discovered that the knife has offsetting disadvantages. They do exist - and are the historical motivations in invent handguns to improve on them.

In this day and age of more than 40 states with "shall issue" concealed carry, use of a knife as a weapon is now relegated to those who can't carry a gun. Whether it's the expense, or the legality is rather moot - guns can be had pretty cheap, less than a lot of knives. The Ruger LCP retails for $280, the Sebenza $350. And for the really cheap end, the "Jennings" pistols are still out on the gun show tables. They can function well enough for one shot.

The cute scene of Indy Jones pulling out his revolver in frustration at the sword wielding assailant was more than just some goofing around on the movie set left in by the editor. It's a statement of those skilled in superior weapons and why they are preferred. Don't fall into the fantasy trap that carrying a big knife will help much. Attackers do exactly that, come unexpectedly and from an ambush to prevent any response at all. Practice skills to resist that before even considering what weapon might be appropriate, and most of the problem is solved.

I agree with you with most of what you said... however a knife does also offer a lot of advantages to someone train in the correct use of the weapon. Disarming can usually be done however there is a lot of risk there as well, no matter the level of training. Image this more than one attacker, first one comes in to attack, a simply side step with a correctly placed knife strike can quickly take that attacker out of the fight and allow you to focus on other threats.

I could go more in depth but the thread is not about correct knife defense use but more so just to see what others carry. But make no mistake a knife is extremely deadly with correct training, however that training also should involve when to pull a weapon, what weapon to pull, or if the threat at hand does not require a weapon at all...

To sum it up a prepare person should have multiple options at hand to handle different levels of threats.

 

[zhyla]

Any knife for self defense requires a skill set of martial arts in depth first. If the user cannot successfully defend themselves in bare hand combatives, disarms, and reverses, they won't even be able to reach for their own knife. Besides, the opponent has graciously offered his, it's simply a matter of taking it.

I think this kind of thinking is very out of touch with how many knife wounds are seen in your local ER. Sure, skill is important, but it's good to remember that any fool can work a knife well enough to end a fight. Kind of off-topic though.

I saw a couple small fixed blades in another thread. I can see carrying those instead of a folder, though it does seem a little less convenient.

 

[JShirley]

If the user cannot successfully defend themselves in bare hand combatives, disarms, and reverses, they won't even be able to reach for their own knife. Besides, the opponent has graciously offered his, it's simply a matter of taking it.

If that sounds like a nearly impossible task, then carrying one in defense will be.

Yeah, I've been training, much of the time pretty seriously, in martial arts since 1994. I don't agree with you at all. A disarm is a damn dangerous thing, especially against a knife. I would in fact generally prefer to just knock the attacker unconscious before kicking the knife away from his body. At contact distance, I'd rather disarm a firearm.

Further, I'd go so far as to say I don't trust the judgement of anyone who'd make a statement such as yours. Among many other things, you're assuming you're facing someone who has no damned clue what he's doing, or you would have never seen the knife in the first place.

If that's your point, though, you're also wrong. Knives do have a place in the defensive envelope. It's at very close range, when your air is running out, or you can't draw your sidearm. It's not a question of what a "superior" weapon is. There is no such thing as a superior weapon, any more than an "ultimate" one. What does exist, is superior for a certain use. Firearms are superior for delivering force over distance with a minimum of training. At close enough range, firearms are no longer superior.

use of a knife as a weapon is now relegated to those who can't carry a gun

As a defender, in general, distance is good. But it's foolish to assume you'll always be able to have it. It helps to have more things in your toolbox than just a hammer, my friend. Layered and redundant in a defensive context are good things. If you have a yard with a fence, bright exterior lights, a dog, and holly bushes planted in front of locked 1st-floor windows, you'll probably never need to use your defensive shotgun, carbine, or handgun to defend your house. Similarly, you should have multiple options available to use when you're out. Giving yourself just one way to run, so to speak, is short-sighted.

John

 

[robinkevin]

I can agree with him as I do believe you should have good training. This is true with a knife, firearm or even a club. Without training any weapon is about as useful as a rock thrown by a child.

But to say a knife isn't a good choice for defense is wrong. Not only does it have very good use in close quarters and often better option than a gun for close and personal (easier to keep a barrel pointed away than a blade with a long cutting edge). But it also has a certain mental advantage many people fear knives more so than firearms, in the middle easy where our boys are fighting now it gives them an advantage to carry a nice large blade as their culture respects and fears blades more so than others. Hence the military will sell soldiers battle axes and other types of bladed weapons, should in my mind be standard issue...

But as I stated before we are getting off topic.

 

[Tirod]

Ahh, you miss the point while admitting it: Going up against a knife means injury, but as noted, doesn't offer "stop them right there" power. Grappling over an extended period of time against a knife wielding opponent means both getting cut up.

It does not mean that either will be immediately incapacitated, or even seriously so. If using a knife for self defense can't stop an attacker, just where does it fit into the repertoire of skills most knife buyers have - which is zero?

Knife self defense is an extremely advanced skill, practiced with a sparring partner, usually not with live blades precisely because of the inherent danger. But it's ok to suggest that all and sundry should seriously consider it when purchasing weapons for self defense? And then point out the victims of their own lack of training populate emergency rooms? They didn't stop the fight, got injured themselves, and are paying a high price subscribing to that fantasy.

What I'm reading is that it's ok to buy knives for self defense, but when credibility is on the line, it's a recommendation by martial artists extending their skill sets and aware of the reality of injury. It's a little late in the conversation when the unskillled and uninformed grab the first line of thought from the opening post, that a knife can be an effective personal self defense tool.

Rather than attack the messenger, let's discuss how self defense as a whole is something to be learned first, and then realize that some tools aren't all that good at doing it. If knives really had an important place in violent interpersonal conflict, then Police Academies and Basic Training would be sand pit exercises in knife use, and the issue weapon of choice a knife. The reality is that it's a small part of the subset of hand to hand combat, with the pistol and rifle the primary tools. They can incapacitate an opponent further than a man's reach, exacty why they're chosen. Knives absolutely cannot.

There's hundreds of thousands of Glocks in holsters on patrol, and Gaston didn't make a fortune selling bayonets. It's ludicrous to say "You don't know what you're talking about" when the victims of a knife fight are guarded by a security officer with a gun in the emergency room.

I just renewed my CCW, 22 years in the Reserves, Infantry and MP. I qualified on three weapons twice annually, but only got knife training twice - once in Basic, once in MOS. Less than two days total, and literally just minutes on the knife. Obviously my betters thought it was all that was needed.

Take your disagreement to them, I'm sure they'd like you to tell them they don't have a clue about it.

 

[hso]

In this day and age of more than 40 states with "shall issue" concealed carry, use of a knife as a weapon is now relegated to those who can't carry a gun.

Obviously a gross over-exaggeration since many people can carry a knife WHERE they are not permitted to carry a gun and many people carry a knife WITH their gun AND knives are incorporated in LE and civilian retention training.

Best not to over-exaggerate the point while trying to make it to avoid being dismissed entirely.

 

[JShirley]

you miss the point while admitting it

Nope. I said you were wrong, either way you meant it.

I never suggested getting no training. If I didn't believe in the value of training, I wouldn't have invested thousands of hours doing it. I said it was silly to believe there was no point in carrying a knife unless you were capable of doing a knife disarm. Dumbest thing I've heard all week, including last week. For one thing, you started with the unwarranted assumption that one would draw a knife to defend against a knife, which is utterly stupid. If you're facing a blade, you want distance, just as if you find yourself trapped with no "stand-off" space, a knife may be the best thing you can use in a bad situation.

There is a place for a knife. The reason it doesn't have have much place in the police or military envelope is the time required to gain sufficient skill, which is also the single biggest reason (contrary to what most people think) that firearms are the dominant issue weapon for militaries: it's just easier to teach the unskilled to use a submachine gun, handgun, or rifle that it was to teach them to use prior weapons systems. (Bows, for instance, were better weapons in most regards than early muskets, and were still better weapons in most regards until dependable repeaters were available. A sword, spear or axe within a few feet is much deadlier than a sidearm.)

Most police agencies barely get enough training to be proficient with their sidearm. Adding another weapons system that society typically believes to be the weapon of the criminal and the insane killer is obviously going to be a liability.

If knives really had an important place in violent interpersonal conflict...then...the issue weapon of choice a knife.

Hahahahaha! Hahahah! Ha. <sniff> Hee. Okay, good one, thanks. The end of my day was a little annoying, so I needed a good laugh.

Now, you're just stepping from seeming, to those who don't read carefully or know better, to maybe know what you're talking about, to just downright silly.

To begin with, the "weapon of choice" when fighting a WAR is a crew-served weapon. That's what I used for all of my kills the last time I was in theater, and speaking as one with a history background, crew-serveds have been the preferred choice for at least the last 150 years. Handguns are not the individual (which is what you meant) "issue weapon of choice" for the military: they are only given to those who might use them in a reactive way. But it's, again, silly just because they're not the "weapon of choice" ( ) to say they don't "have an important place in violent interpersonal conflict" (sidebar: what's the difference between "personal" and "interpersonal"? Wanting to be sure the violence didn't happen alone? ).

With your background, you should know by now that you weren't thinking carefully enough when you wrote your last post. Or the one before it, for that matter. Of course knife training isn't much of a concentration in our military! Some platoons struggle just to get everyone to pass BRM and qualify. When would they have time to devote to something they will hopefully never use in a violent way?

But you want to try to compare military action- movement to contact, ambush, react to contact, etc- with a citizen in the US being attacked by criminals? Really? Wow. No, you're absolutely right. The US citizen shouldn't use a knife when he's about to be choked unconscious, or his weapon hand has been grabbed as he attempts to draw his sidearm.

He should wait for the other 11 members of his squad to come save him. He should call for fire, maybe. Perhaps he should use his grenades, his claymore, his M136. Oh, wait- not only does he not have those things, the attacker probably isn't wearing an enemy uniform, and the good guy will no longer be a good guy if he engages random individuals at 200 meters.

Take your disagreement to them, I'm sure they'd like you to tell them they don't have a clue about it.

Ah, the "appeal to authority". I've met very few drill sergeants that had a very wide scope of weapons learning. I heard one say the he had "fired .308 out of his AK". I had another make me do pushups at the silly idea that not all M16 mags were 30-rounders. Most folks in the military know enough about their weapons systems to get their job done, and that's about it. I've heard multiple briefs in the last two weeks about how rifles with less than 16" barrels were not allowed on the plane. Of course, almost everyone has an M4.

 

[hso]

I'm a huge proponent of training with defensive tools, but it is foolish to think that an untrained person is a greater danger to themselves than doing nothing when attacked simply because they're untrained.

Just as an untrained person might stop an attack with a gun and untrained person using a stick or knife in the most basic ways might stop an attack. They are not as assured of doing so nor are they as assured of doing it quickly enough to avoid injury or death, BUT they're assured of having a chance. What they need to understand is that they shouldn't resort to this except as a final option (which is what we tell everyone about using a firearm). If they happen to end up facing a more determined and skilled attacker, they were going to be facing them with or without training/skill anyway and doing nothing when there's no other option except to fight for their life is absurd.

While I've invested years training empty hand and with stick and blade I've known 2 people with no training, but with small knives and determination use them, to stop their attackers. Nothing fancy in the way of knife or technique, but effective in getting their attacker off of them and away. Would a skilled attacker have taken the knife away from them? Possibly, but they weren't facing skilled attackers and they didn't let them know they had their little knives until they were twisting and prying with them stuck in their attacker.

 

[Sniper X]

I am getting back into fixed blades so carry one a lot...a small one. Usually a ESSE or RAT 3.

 

[Marlin60Man]

I really like having my ESEE Izula on me. It's pretty handy just for everyday simple cutting tasks... Seems silly to use a fixed blade to open up envelopes and candy wrappers, but sometimes it's easier to just grab it off my belt than to dig in my pocket for my folder. It's very small... Blade is under 3", the whole knife is under 6", and very light.

Mostly though it's just my "backup, just-in-case" kind of knife. Came with a fire-steel and a couple of other items ( I only carry the knife, the fire-steel, a whistle and a "survival tips" card that has useful stuff on it ) in some kind of "survival kit". I kind of like that since I drive around in some rural areas and have been stranded from time to time. I mean, everyone has their "truck knife" for that kind of stuff, but I just like having it on me at all times. Handy and very useful, plus it's awesome for camping/hiking outings.

I still carry a folder though... You just have to have a folder too. Mine is a Case Trapper, yellow with the spey and clip blade and a nice patina. It's a lot better to have that around in public than to pull out any kind of fixed blade. You don't really wanna seem like Crocodile Dundee handing someone a hunting knife when they need to cut a tag off their coat, but it's also plenty of knife to be useful. I like the old carbon-bladed slipjoints like this, they tend to put people at ease and remind them of their fathers/relatives.

I also have a Leatherman, but I really don't like the knives on it, mostly like it for the screw-drivers and pliers--bottle opener has come in handy a few times too . Knives are useful for beater blades though I guess.

I don't carry any of mine as weapons. I don't wanna wind up cut by any of them... Not to mention wind up on that jury trial.

Long story short, I like to be prepared.


Also, I really like the "Needs Work" and have one as well. I have carried it once or twice, but I don't really like the "flipper" when I have it in the pocket. It's cool because you can also disable the assisted-opening mechanism fairly easily. It's got probably the thinnest, sharpest point of any knife I've seen... In a good way though.

 

[Tirod]

It's not High Road to snip and clip quotations to distort what I said.

The fact is that it's irresponsible to promote knife combatives and suggest their use to an untrained public. As said, the emergency rooms are already full of those who try.

I no way did I day an untrained person shouldn't do anything - but what's getting ignored is that to defend oneself, it's simply not the best approach to recommend advanced skill level combatives that can't and won't work because the individual hasn't and won't practice.

They buy the weapon and think possession alone will make their day. And the result is a trip to the emergency room, they got beat down.

I've expressed this opinion for years, posts are on other boards, the know-it-alls pounce on every possible issue to susport what they have spent many long hours to gain - a fluent and mastered approach to combatives.

Are you seriously recommending knife combatives to completely untrained people? While I certainly think CCW licensing is rudimentary at best, at least the attendance of a mandatory course introduces some expertise to handling a confrontation. But the use of a knife doesn't? I don't see that being done, but I'm saying just give up?

You admitted the reality - having standoff and not being within the other persons reach is far superior in reducing injury to oneself and controlling the situation. Guns can do that. Knives will more often than not get the wielder into a physical confrontation and cut up.

Which do you want your untrained son or daughter to use? Knife, or gun? You can sidestep taking responsibility by arguing about the tactics of arguement, or face the fact that recommending the use of a knife as a self defense weapon is NOT the best answer.

If a physical handicap exists, the gun is a better choice. If little training is what is forced on the situation, gun use is the recommended professional choice.

The knife? It's not for beginners, not for the disabled, and not for those who can't dedicate years to study. In other words, it's pretty much not the answer. And, that's exactly what is happening.

Except those who irresponsibly recommend knives as weapons, and who should know better. Obviously they are in complete denial of the overwhelming evidence and simply reacting to what they see as an attack on their ego or self worth. An advanced master of an art doesn't react that way, they understand that the beginner needs fundamentals first, and that the student can easily misunderstand an advanced concept - they know enough to get themselves in trouble.

That's exactly what I've been repeating over and over - self defense with a knife isn't for beginners and it's irresponsible to suggest it as a course of action. It would be equally reprehensible to give a new recruit a loaded M16 fresh off the bus.

While we may have the legal right to do something, it certainly doesn't mean you have the moral right to recommend it. And you certainly won't be there to clean up the mess.

Do you or your instructors hand out "live" blades in the first hour of instruction to new students? Who do you think reads these posts?

Making blanket recommendations that cause others to literally spill their blood is unprofessional, reprehensible, and not High Road. Knife combatives are not for beginners and not taught to beginners in self defense by any recognized authority in armed combatives. Just the internet.

 

[JShirley]

It's not High Road to snip and clip quotations to distort what I said.

Absolutely. And I didn't~ it would be sophistry, rather like your "appeal to authority".

There is no excuse for not practicing with whatever one chooses to carry. Despite what you seem to believe, not every state requires a test to grant CCW. How did I suggest "advanced skill level combatives"? YOU were the one who suggested knives should only be carried if the user can do knife disarms, which is of course absolutely rubbish.

having standoff and not being within the other persons reach is far superior in reducing injury to oneself and controlling the situation.

At the risk of seeming rude- well, duh. If you've ever paid the least bit of attention to what I've said about facing a knife, I have advocated gaining distance EVERY. Single. Time. I only have over 13,000 posts: this should be pretty damn simple to verify.

Guns can do that. Knives will more often than not get the wielder into a physical confrontation and cut up.

Again, you really haven't paid any attention at all to what I've said, have you? The ONLY defensive place for a knife is when you HAVE NO DISTANCE, and your life or serious injury is on the line. Why in the bloody blue blazes would you suggest not fighting with every tool you have, when the other option is death? You're also injecting your own apparently active fantasy life into this. Millions of US citizens carry a knife every single day, and oddly enough, most of them don't get "cut up".

You can sidestep taking responsibility by arguing about the tactics of arguement, or face the fact that recommending the use of a knife as a self defense weapon is NOT the best answer.

Okay, so you can stumble over yourself attempting to address my addressing your absolutely ludicrous comments, then blithely ignore what I have said a minimum of hundreds of times on this board: knives in general are NOT (I can make the font on this bigger, if it will help you read it) ideal for defensive use in most situations. At the same time, if you deliberately choose to not use some options that could save your life, and which are easily added to your toolbox, you're an idiot.

Knives are usually best used as tools, and even just as pure tools, they can save lives. They can also have a place (please pay attention: I didn't say THE place, and I sure as hell never have advocated brandishing a knife, which is just about the quickest way to get dead I can imagine~ you just kind of straw manned that in there, appropros of nothing) in the defensive toolbox.

I'm not too worried about anyone taking what I'm saying out of context: you're the only one who seems to be having a hard time understanding what I'm writing.

Knife combatives are not for beginners and not taught to beginners in self defense by any recognized authority in armed combatives. Just the internet.

Kind of like folks who might suggest only carrying a knife if you can do knife disarms. I know- silly, right?

 

[conw]

The knife? It's not for beginners, not for the disabled, and not for those who can't dedicate years to study.

I have no idea where this comes from. Years of study? To effectively and aggressively stab or cut someone in self-defense?


Southnarc teaches a course called In Extremis Knife or IEK. It's similar to his Practical Unarmed Combat (PUC) course. PUC lays the foundation for his excellent 2-day in-close pistol class. It is my opinion and that of many others, that ECQC is the best bang for your buck and time spent in the whole training world for 0-5 feet.

No, it doesn't make you an expert, but it teaches you how to survive a lot better than most people who haven't had it, including many seasoned cops, military, and "martial artists" by their own admission after taking the course.

One lesson SN and ECQC inevitably teaches is that more practice, particularly more status-quo practice, is not necessarily better. I would say people who think it takes years of practice to learn are probably doing it wrong...

Anyway, his IEK course, or just PUC with a small fixed blade plugged in, creates individuals who have VERY viable knowledge of defensive use of knives. True, knife use is more limited in scope than handguns (or crew served weapons ), but that doesn't mean it takes years to learn to use one effectively in the real world. It actually is a fairly SIMPLE skill that must be layered onto a solid practical knowledge of the fight, which again, SN does in 4-20 hours depending on your perspective (PUC @4 hours is good, ECQC is better @ an additional 16 hours). Because it is simple you actually reach a level of proficiency so quickly it is better to focus on other skills most of the time.

And unlike gun skills knife work itself is not a very perishable skill. There's no reason any gun owner who wants to go the extra mile SHOULDN'T have them.

 

[Sav .250]

Different strokes for different folks.......... Folder, Buck 110.

 

[alaskanativeson]

]I am getting back into fixed blades so carry one a lot...a small one. Usually a ESSE or RAT 3.

Sniper, one suggestion: Try to find someplace that has the knives locally so you can hold each of them before you buy. Apart from Ontario's lower level of quality, the handle size made a huge difference in which knife I would want to use. The Ontario Rat 3 was a terrible size handle for my hands. I have short fingers and a wide hand, the RAT 3 just wasn't comfortable to me at all. I went with the Rat Cutlery (now ESEE) RC-4. The blade is a little longer, and so is the handle. The handle is probably only 1/2 inch longer or so, but it makes a HUGE difference in how it fits in my hand. ESEE now also has a 3 inch, I'd highly recommend either that or their 4 inch. But it would really be in your best interest if you could actually hold each first.

Just my $0.02 worth.

 

[Zeke/PA]

I really do like folders mainly because I've become a big fan of the Opinel offerings.
I mostly carry a #10 in a belt flashlight holder and occassionally a #12 in a homemade leather sheath.
Sometimes a Case Trapper in the appropriate belt sheath.

 

[aaronu]

Living in civilization I carry a folder -- a Benchmade 730 which I happen to treasure. When I need to dress nicer sometimes I'll substitute a Spyderco Dragonfly in steel or a Benchmite.

And other times I'll pocket carry my Scrapivore neck knife in its Kydex sheath, just because I like it.

All of them are tools first and weapons a distant last, dangerous only to the steak on my plate. I am no knife fighting expert. But if it were all I had and I needed to make someone GETOFF me, I wouldn't think twice.

Cheers,

Aaron