|
KNIFE VS. GUN: INSIDE SIX FEET, I'LL TAKE THE
KNIFE
By Frank Borelli
Borelli Consulting
Incorporated (BCI)
Okay,
on the surface, it’s an insane statement:
if I have to fight someone, hand to hand, I’d
rather be armed with a knife than a gun. However, if
you take time to think about it, it makes perfect sense.
For me, this revelation came while I was attending
an Instructor course on the “Tactical Folding
Knife”. I’ve always had an affinity for
knives and this particular program was especially appealing
to me.
Now about that statement: “ . . . I’d
rather be armed with a knife than a gun.” All
of us who are intimately familiar with handguns know
that almost all of them, and certainly all of those
from reputable manufacturers, have what is called
a “disconnect safety”. This safety keeps
the weapon from being fired when it’s not completely
in battery. When the weapon is not fully in battery,
the chamber isn’t completely sealed. If the
weapon were fired “out of battery”, explosive
gases and propelled material could be blown back
toward the shooter. To push a handgun out of battery,
all one needs to do is push the slide back about
one-quarter of an inch, give or take dependent on
the specific weapon. I once knew a Military Policeman
who demonstrated this; his downfall was that he did
it with a loaded weapon. You can imagine the results.
My suggestion would be this: if you are concerned
about whether or not your disconnect safety is operating
properly, take the unloaded and properly secured
weapon to a gunsmith or armorer. Let someone with
the proper training function test it for you.
So, think about this hand-to-hand fight. If you
are justified in using lethal force, you have your
gun in hand. If your assailant’s hands are
empty, he has two hands with which to grab at your
weapon, and all of the weapon, with the exception
of the grip in your hand, is his to grab. So, that
is two of his hands on the slide, barrel and dust
cover of your pistol, to your one hand on the grip
and your finger on the trigger? If so, his pulling
may result in an unintended discharge. If not, you
are at quite the disadvantage.
All of this, of course, is assuming you are armed
with a pistol. If you have a double action revolver,
all anyone has to do is secure the cylinder. If the
cylinder won’t turn, you can’t pull the
trigger and you’re back to that tug-of-war.
If you have a single action revolver, you’re
pretty close to that unintended discharge scenario
above. Now ask yourself this: how hard would it be,
in this tug-of-war over your pistol, to force the
slide out of battery? Not very hard is the obvious
answer. With the slide out of battery, what are you
having a tug-of-war over? The answer is, Who will
have final control of this weapon and the ability
to use it.
To adequately gauge the outcome of such a tug-of-war
we would have to know the knowledge, skills, fighting
abilities, size, strength, etc. of each of the involved
parties. It is certainly not a tug-of-war I’d
be happy to be in. I know of just this type of situation
that occurred involving a seasoned officer whose
defensive tactics and officer survival skills were
top notch. The officer was a Defensive Tactics instructor
with over twenty years of martial arts training and
experience. The end result? The perpetrator was shot
during the struggle. I’m not sure there is
a “better” outcome for this scenario,
but from the police point of view (and that’s
my background), at least the officer won the fight
over the gun.
Now back to that question of knife or gun: if I’m
in that same fight, holding a good quality lock blade “tactical” folding
knife, there is little for my assailant to grab.
After all, the knife only consists of the grips,
which I’m holding, and the blade that is presented
as I’ve been taught. What is the assailant
going to grab to try to take this weapon? Bear in
mind that we’ve already stipulated that lethal
force is an acceptable option, otherwise we wouldn’t
have had out that pistol as a level of force. If
the bad guy tries to take the knife, he’s going
to have to grab either me or the knife blade. If
he’s stupid enough to grab the knife blade,
more power to him. If he grabs me, my training is
such that I can still use the knife as a lethal force
tool.
I also have to think about the psychology of survival
in these situations. If I have a gun and I manage
to shoot my assailant, there is no guarantee that
the wound will stop him. Although we’ve all
seen actors blown dozens of feet across a room or
through a nicely shattering window by a single nine
millimeter round, we’ve also all seen hundreds
of scenes where the hero-actor of the movie gets
shot, sometimes repeatedly, and continues valiantly
on to win the fight. The bottom line is that few
of us have actually been shot, and we don’t
know how we, or our assailant(s), will react to that
gunshot wound until it happens. What we believe,
combined with our will to live, is what often determines
how effective that gunshot wound is.
Now let’s consider the knife injury. Is there
anyone reading this article that hasn’t been
cut? Not necessarily as the result of an attack,
but even just quartering a chicken in the kitchen
or whittling when we were younger. The large majority
of us, if not all of us, know exactly what a knife
blade feels like as it penetrates or lacerates our
skin and the meat underneath. I’d venture the
guess that quite a few of us have had stitches as
a result of an accidental knife wound during our
years of growing up and simply living life. A knife
wound is a known injury – something we all
remember not enjoying. Further, when you examine
the impact of the movies, just as we did above with
gunshot wounds, wounds from edged weapons are often
horrifc. Freddy Kruger literally disemboweled his
victims with his finger knives. People are beheaded
or lose limbs to attacks from longer blades. The
point is that while gun shot wounds create an injury
with unknown levels of related pain and results,
the knife wound is a known experience with serious
psychological trauma attached.
I know a few defensive tactics instructors who are
teaching unarmed edged weapon defense. The primary
method I’ve seen taught originated in England
where the “Bobbies” don’t usually
carry sidearms. If they are attacked with a knife,
redirecting the attack, making distance and deploying
their handgun is not an option. Instead, they close
distance to violently disable the knife-attack system
and then further disable their assailant. The “knife-attack
system” is everything on the assailant from
the shoulder to the knife. Additionally, since someone
has presented lethal force in an attack against them,
there are few restrictions on the force the “Bobby” can
use in return to disable the bad guy.
Considering all of the above, I have to say that
faced with an assailant, in a hand-to-hand fight
situation where I can justify the use of lethal force,
I’d rather have that quality folding knife.
The training that I’ve had has given me the
knowledge and skills to deploy that weapon in such
a way that I believe my attack will almost immediately
disable my opponent. I feel confident that the injuries
I can create with my knife will be more quickly disabling
than the injury created by a gun shot wound. Why?
Because of the type of attack I’d employ and
the personal nature of the knife injuries delivered,
I believe my assailant would immediately end his
attack and most probably begin begging for medical
attention just as quickly, if he can.
Don’t take my word for it.
Look around; read other articles; search the internet.
There are several academies that provide training
with knives. Further, investigate the knives themselves.
My favorites come from Emerson (the Commander in
my pocket), Masters of Defense (the Dieter CQD on
my gunbelt) and Spyderco (the Delica or Endura in
a different pocket).
|
