Modern Scenarios When a Sword Would Be Preferable to a Firearm

Status
Not open for further replies.
blitzer0101
How wide and how thick was knife, or should I say "dagger"?
It is amazing to me how our military is often given orders that limit the size of knife they can carry with them. Its as if its ok to carry a gun or grenades, but a longer than "X" inches knife is a clear mark of a dangerous pyschotic. Bladeforum.com has had similar comments.
 
works for me

CTDonath,
Got a Kukri attached to my BOB, just in case.

Scenarios where a sword can be used?
A sword/knife is a tool, just like a handgun is a tool. Each has its useage. Some tools can be pressed into double duty if the occasion demands it.
I.E. say your base camp gets overrun and you are running low on ammo.
Another example...let's say that Y2K had really hit and the social fabric was torn and your family had made the decision to hold the fort and not bugout. Over a period of time, the scavengers got real aggressive and knew about your location and the fact that you had supplies and they tried to take your place at night.
Anyway, I believe all of you if pressed can come up with similar scenarios.:evil: :confused:
 
I don't understand this thread. On another thread, there was a discussion about how lethal knives were under 20 feet, even against an opponent armed with a gun. Elsewhere, I was reading about how dangerous a baseball bat could be...even against someone with a gun.

So why is a sword not regarded in the same light? Nobody is advocating facing the US Army while armed with swords.

I viewed this thread as a discussion on whether you would feel confident with a handgun (say 9mm) against a determined intruder wielding a sword or machette in your living room. In my living room, this means under 20 feet. My personal take is that both parties can expect to be hurt badly. I would not be confident in being able to effectively stop a machette armed intruder with a handgun, without being seriously injured as well. Would you be better off with a sword yourself in that situation?
 
Sword play gan be an amazing thing to watch. It is, however, a skill that must be difficult to learn, and as difficult to maintin. Can't really do any range time practice with a sword, can you?

That said, if SHTF, a good sword and the ability to use it could prove to be invaluable. No need to worry about ammo supplies...
 
I've successfully defended myself twice with a Louisville Slugger. Both times against multiples and both times the police determined that I had the right to do so and I survived the civil suits. Although I would've rather used the custom English Bastard sword I had made fifteen years ago, I likely would've ended up in jail and lost everything I had in the civil suits. *shrugs*
Biker
 
I viewed this thread as a discussion on whether you would feel confident with a handgun (say 9mm) against a determined intruder wielding a sword or machette in your living room.
Click to expand...
Me vs. intruder with sword? certainly dangerous, but can be handled with confidence. The likelyhood of facing someone who actually knows how to be effective with a 3-foot razor blade in a confined space is unlikely. Machete would be more of a problem, but still faces the same problem of walls being too close for a swing. Either faced off with a trained handgun operator would probably lose (again, certainly dangerous).

Reversed - trained swordsman vs. untrained shooter - would favor the blade. Getting off the line of fire plus one small-radius stroke could easily end the fight.

The issue isn't so much tool vs. tool (so long as they are in or near range), the issue is ability and determination of the one wielding it - just remember that idiots flailing weapons are still very dangerous.
 
I trained in kenjitsu for 4 years, I feel very confident that i could defend my self with my katana inside a home. In my class most of us could cover 7-9 feet and strike an opp. in less than 1/2 sec. A trained swordsman can get the tip of a katana moving well over 125 mph. If the attacker was not very skilled with his firearm I could very likely come out unharmed. Most sword duels happen so fast that onlookers cannot tell what hapend.
 
Kukri?

Ever use a kukri to cut a tree down? (small branches at least?)
My cousin was stationed in Korea at the DMZ. One of the contingents in the same AO was a company of Gurkhas. He watched them work out from time to time. He sent me a pair of Kukris. I have used them in M.A. since the 70's.

I now have a pair in my BUGout gear but I switched to Cold Steel Kukris, like the feel better.. more fluid. I also have a Cold Steel tomahawk in my pack. Either weapon has the weight where I prefer it in the cutting and hacking maneuvers. I've been in different M.A.s for over 40 years now and I've narrowed my preferences for these weapons for my gear. I carry Kershaw and Benchmade folders as daily carry.

Good luck on your search. Half the fun is the hunt.
 
Either faced off with a trained handgun operator would probably lose (again, certainly dangerous)....

....Reversed - trained swordsman vs. untrained shooter - would favor the blade. Getting off the line of fire plus one small-radius stroke could easily end the fight.
Click to expand...

Hi there, appreciate your response. And I agree with what you said. But if this fight happened at close range (as in a home invasion), is it really likely that there would be a "winner" and "loser"? I'm of the rather pessimistic view that there would be two losers in this fight.

I admit having an interest in this thread because of a few "butcher knife" and machette attacks in my local news lately. Very brutal and messy. I don't remember if they were specifically home invasions, but I do remember having my doubts about the ability of a handgun to stop the attacker in those cases.
 
I don't think that anyone doubts that a sword is perfectly lethal in CQB. As are knives, crowbars, baseball bats, etc etc etc, all to varying degrees.

The point is that while one might very well carry a knife conveniently, for utility or defense, or have possession of a ball bat or other instrument at the time of an attack, it is unlikely that you would "just happen" to have your sword handy. Having a sword at hand means one of two things:

1. The bad guy really did break into the wrong rec room.

2. You are planning ahead for your own self defense.

The first is a factor of chance (mugged you on your way to get your katana appraised, or en route to or from iado class), the latter implies that you have carried or positioned a weapon with forethought. And if that is the case, you are, in general, MUCH better served with a rifle, shotgun or handgun. Basically, if you're going to put up with the logistical inconveniences of having a 3-4" piece of metal with you, it might as well be one that goes BANG.

One notes that armies and police forces don't use swords nowadays. This is for a reason.

That Said (tm), I find swords insanely cool, and I own several. Are they deadly weapons? Oh heck yes. But if someone breaks into Ye Olde Crib, I'm grabbing my 870, not my cavalry saber.

Mike
 
Old thread but good thread

Anthony:

Good thread here. I have been a martial arts instructor for 25 years now. Regarding seeing a niche for a particular blade, in fact, they all have such. Some will serve several purposes, but all serve one purpose best. Regarding blade, stick, firearm, foot or fist, it all depends on where one is, who/what the adversary is/are. Life's best possibility is to simply be widely trained. We do not allow our students to begin training on weapons until the have gained control of their own body first. That is at 1st degree Black belt. Thereafter, they can venture into weapons. This was all interesting reading. Thanks to all who have contributed.

Doc2005
 
Attack of the mortadella wielding Zombie Italian chef.
 
Can't see the sword as an alternative to a firearm really, but can see it displace a wide variety of non lethal weapons for cops in mass interpersonal confrontation (riots).

It makes available 4 modes of use:

#1 you can use the flat to speed up the slow in varying degrees with a smack on the backside :eek: . Nice way to clear the streets of mildly recalcitrant idiots that aren't quite worth shooting

#2 You may use the point to stimulate the slightly more recalcitrant to hasten their departure by "poking" them in non sensitive areas :uhoh:

#3 You may use the back to break arms and heads in a non lethal way when the level of force must be escalated a notch :mad:

#4 At any point in the encounter you may instantly employ it in a lethal mode if required by converting the "poke" to the skewer maneuver or hacking off a limb or head :evil:

It is a terror weapon unlike a gun, in that it has a strong psychological impact.
Very few angry people really respect guns, they have no frame of reference, very few of them having been shot. They only know what they see on TV, someone slumping to the ground after a brief shout. On teh other hand almost everyone has at one time or another been hit with a stick or cut with a sharp object and the potential for such treatment is a powerful inducement to obey. :cool:

Sam :D
 
Having spent some time in Central America during periods of political unrest, and witnessed the wounds left behind by a determined individual with a machete, I added on to my back pack. I bought a midsized about 21 inch machete and a canvas sheath for about 4 dollars in Columbia

In a SHTF scenario the ability to carry a single device that would double as a hatchet, game tool, silent weapon would be useful. I saw several people in the backcountry who had terrible wounds from defending them sselves by raising their arms against a machete blow. including one memorable guy who wandered on the hospital grounds with his forearm stuck to his head by the machete stuck in his head. he lived. at least long enough to leave the hospital.
 
Swords are not meant for confronting. That's hollywood silliness.
Swords a either for:
- a quick disarm. When the enemy tries tu pull or aim his handgun, aim for the elbow. The rest is obvious, dis-arm :)
- stop the enemy. As he needs his head to do anything, either make them decide which half to use by splitting it or make it easy for them by removing the head.

Standing around and looking tough will mostly get you killed, immediate action with ANY weapon will mostly help you prevail.
 
Pauli,

You owe me:
1. A new monitor.
2. A new keyboard.
3. New nose hairs and sinuses. Freshly brewed and extremely hot Darjeeling through the nose is excruciating. (While I can't smell a thing, I can breathe much easier, so okay, you're off the hook for the first two. :D )

I can only add I have visions of the BG in my hallway saying in a Monty Python accent "It's only a flesh wound.", after I hack his arm off with my US Army Officer's Saber. With Mrs. Scout26 saying "What in the name of all that is Sacred and Holy are you doing ????" She then shoots said BG with her shotgun and turns to me. "Next time you do something that stupid, I might shoot you too. Now go clean up the mess you made."
 
Swords would be preferable you firearms if:

1) You cannot leagally have a firearm (in NY city, Chiciago, Japan, etc.)

2) You live in a situation where all rounds will penetrate into neighbors (apartment buildings, etc.)

A sword can defeat a firearm IF YOU USE THE PROPER TACTICS!!! My sugestion is you protect one room. Intruder with weapon enters your room, you hit him with your sword (or baseball bat or chair, etc.). Don't give an intruduer the chance to inflict harm upon you, defend yourself.
 
How about fight CQB all alone against multiple opponents with a handgun in one hand and a sword in the other?
Click to expand...

I think I'd rather put distance between them and I, and keep both hands on my most effective weapon (if you can't guess, it isn't the sword).
 
I think if your going to go through the trouble of concealing a sword you may as well get somthing like an M1 carbine with a bayonet (same lenth, but a hell of a lot more usefull).
 
Having been in numerous Iaido classes and competitions, I can unequivocally say that carrying a sword is a big pain in the a$$. Clumsy, you have to be very careful not to bump your saya against anything, which is especially difficult in Western architecture which is not well suited to carrying a full size katana in your obi. Most samurai simply carried their swords in their hand much like a walking stick (but not used as such) a majority of the time. Some of the koryu incorporate techniques which use the saya (scabbard) as a blocking and striking implement based on this type of in-hand carry.

Within about 10 yards, I'd give the swordsman the hands down advantage over the gunman. To disarm a gun wielding opponent, simply cut off the hand holding the gun. He will have no way to stop you from doing this, and the kote stroke is extremely quick, near impossible to avoid if you have no experience against it.

That said, unless you have some way to make about 26-30 of blade unnoticeable, it's gonna be real obvious that you're carrying.

The advantage that sword training gives you is steadiness of nerve and good posture. The footwork that I use for shooting on the move is called ayumi ashi in kendo class, and training in walking while holding the tip of the shinai steady is great training for holding the front sight of your pistol steady while on the move.

Train sword, fight with gun and knife. History makes the winner of the debate clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Software versus Hardware Orientation
Replies
3
Views
847
TheMariner
T
hso
  • Locked
Bronze Swords
Replies
13
Views
959
Ranald
R
B
  • Locked
All you wanted to Know about Swords
Replies
17
Views
962
Marko Kloos
M
C
  • Locked
Short swords
2 3
Replies
72
Views
4K
hso
hso
ArfinGreebly
  • Locked
Short Sword?
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
6K
hso
hso
Back
Top