# The new guy's knife of choice...



## squirepens (May 14, 2004)

Hey guys, I just picked up this knife today. The link's at the bottom. Found out that my switchblade and bali are illegal here. I knew the switchblade was but the bali kinda surprised me ( it's not auto so why's it illegal?) Didn't have enough to get the benchmade I wanted, but this one seems to be pretty good. Any of you have experience with smith and wesson knives? What about the size? Following the advice of another member in my last post I got a small one to avoid killing ( at least as easily as with a big blade. ) Any thoughts are welcome.

http://store.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=293429&item=831537&sw_activeTab=4http://http://store.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=293429&item=831537&sw_activeTab=4

Squirepens


----------



## lonewolf12563 (May 14, 2004)

Sorry but I think it is a piece of crap. The size is too small for self defense. Check out ebay for great deals on knives. You would be better off with a Gerber Guardian. But if you bought your knife for utility it should suit your needs. Ed


----------



## squirepens (May 14, 2004)

A piece of crap because of the make and quality? Or because it's small? If you're just thinking I need a bigger knife, then say so. But don't be dissin the knife foo. lol

Seriously though is there any reason why? Not being an *** or anything, but I'd like to know opinions rather than "I like it" or "I don't like it". 

Squirepens, keeper of the small knife


----------



## KenpoTex (May 15, 2004)

I don't like those either, in my case it's from personal experience.  At one time I owned two of the full-size (4" blade) SWAT's.  I didn't feel that the blades were of very good quality nor are the locks very reliable (the locks on both ceased to stay secure after only about 6 months of carry and I didn't abuse them either).  The blade is made out of 440-C which is not a very good knife steel.  While you can get it sharp, it will not hold the edge.  I would recomend something in ATS-34, AUS-6, or AUS-8, although 440-A is not too bad.   One last thing, If the price on the website you linked to was what you paid for it then you got screwed like a two-dollar hooker( I have a buddy who is a dealer and he can get SWAT's for about $10, even with the markup you shouldn't have paid that much).  You can find a knife by Cold Steel, CRKT, Kershaw, Buck, or Spyderco for about the same price ($40-$50)and any of those are better than the SWAT.

As far as the Balisong thing, they're illegal where I live too.  The reason? they frighten the sheeple...oops I mean people.  Most of those types of laws were made back in the 60's (if I'm not mistaken) when the only options for knives were your grandaddy's Old-Timer or a Switchblade or Bali.  Nowadays those laws are kind of obsolete due to knives that can be opened with one hand; especially those like the assisted opening models from SOG, Kershaw, and Camillus.  As a matter of fact, Emerson knives with the "wave" feature are even faster than automatics because they open as they clear the pocket.  Anyway, I'm done ranting...now go get a real knife


----------



## Cruentus (May 15, 2004)

squirepens said:
			
		

> A piece of crap because of the make and quality? Or because it's small? If you're just thinking I need a bigger knife, then say so. But don't be dissin the knife foo. lol
> 
> Seriously though is there any reason why? Not being an *** or anything, but I'd like to know opinions rather than "I like it" or "I don't like it".
> 
> Squirepens, keeper of the small knife



For the price, you may have been able to better in terms of blade quality and design. But, it will work for self defense.

Too small for self defense....whatever. An inch and a half is all you need.

At least, thats what she told me.  :ultracool


----------



## squirepens (May 15, 2004)

Yeah and as I was told in the last post I put up, a small knife is damaging and harder to be lethal. I was really talking more about the quality and craftsmanship. If I wanted to carry a big knife I'd carry the my bali, cause down here anything over 3 inches is illegal.

Squirepens


----------



## KenpoTex (May 16, 2004)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> Too small for self defense....whatever. An inch and a half is all you need.





			
				squirepens said:
			
		

> a small knife is damaging and harder to be lethal.



And this is a good thing why?  In my opinion if you are carrying a weapon for self defense whether it's a firearm, a knife, or some kind of impact weapon (or all of the above) you should carry the largest/most powerful weapon that you can legally and comfortably carry.  Yeah, a knife with a 1.5" blade can be used for S.D. (in fact, it's long enough to reach most of the main arteries) but I would rather have something larger not only because it makes it easier to inflict damage but I have more reach therefore don't have to be quite as close.  In another thread someone said that they carry a small knife deliberately in order to minimize the chance of killing someone.  If that's your opinion then you're welcome to it.  To me that doesn't make any sense.  Why? Because if I am in a situation where I was forced to use a weapon (ie. multiple attackers or an armed attacker) _not_ killing the guy(s) is not something that I'm necessarily going to be worried about.  Think about it, if you are justified in using lethal force whether it's a weapon or your M.A. training then that means you are justified in killing the person.  I'm not saying that you should administer a coup de grace after the threat is neutralized, just that if the circumstances are dire enough to introduce a weapon into the scenario then you should use it with the intent of eliminating your opponent.  In other words, if I have to shoot somebody, I'm not going to aim at his leg or his shoulder so as not to kill him, I'm going to aim at his chest with the intent of taking him out.  If he doesn't die then goody for him, if he does, so be it.  Callous? Yes, but the person(s) attacking you are not going to worry about whether they kill or seriously injure you or not.  The only thing that is accomplished by deliberately selecting smaller "less-lethal" tools is that you are reducing your chances of emerging unscathed...or at all.

Just my $0.02


----------



## squirepens (May 16, 2004)

My opinion here is that with a small blade you can deal out a shitload of damage, but at the same time if you wanted to kill somebody you'd almost be FORCED to deliver the "coup de grace" as you put it. With the "largest, most powerful weapon" I can carry, it actually takes more effort NOT to kill the guy than it does to just kill him. And for people like myself who have a pretty strong aversion to killing, that's an important factor. If I can just hack him up without having to worry about killing him, I'm more likely to concentrate on the situation at hand, and less likely to "pull my punches" (or cuts) so to speak. I'm carrying a knife because I want a force multiplier, not because I want lethal force. If I wanted lethal force I'd carry a gun.

Squirepens bearer of the small knife


----------



## KenpoTex (May 16, 2004)

squirepens said:
			
		

> With the "largest, most powerful weapon" I can carry, it actually takes more effort NOT to kill the guy than it does to just kill him. And for people like myself who have a pretty strong aversion to killing, that's an important factor. If I can just hack him up without having to worry about killing him, I'm more likely to concentrate on the situation at hand, and less likely to "pull my punches" (or cuts) so to speak.


 Like I said before, you're entitled to your opinion; however, I still disagree.  The fact that carrying a smaller/less powerful weapon makes it harder to kill someone is exactly the situation I want to avoid.  If you are forced to use a weapon then the S*** has hit the fan and you need to neutralize the threat as quickly as possible.  This is especially true in situations where you are facing multiple attackers.  In this type of situation, every second that you spend dealing with one guy means extra time for the other guys to do their thing.  Also, like I said before, If you are forced to use a weapon it is safe to assume that the other guy(s) are armed and he/they are not going to share your aversion to killing and consequently, they _are_ going to use the best weapons they can get their hands on.  The end result is that you are putting yourself at a serious, and very possibly fatal, disadvantage.  As far as the "strong aversion to killing" that you mention, I'm the same way, I don't neccessarily want to have to kill someone, however, if the choice is between me and them I'm going to make damned sure it ain't me.



			
				squirepens said:
			
		

> I'm carrying a knife because I want a force multiplier, not because I want lethal force. If I wanted lethal force I'd carry a gun.


  My problem with this line of thinking is that a knife _is_ lethal force (in legal terms, so is any weapon).  If you use a knife on someone the cops aren't going to care whether the blade was 1.5" or 4", you used a deadly weapon.  This would be like saying that a .22 is just a force multiplier but a .45 is lethal force.  
  It really comes down to a personal choice, if you choose to carry certain weapons in an effort to avoid killing someone, more power to you.  I just feel that it is ill-advised to deliberately reduce your chances of success.


----------



## Cruentus (May 17, 2004)

kenpotex,

You are entitled to your opinion, but I would avoid carrying a large knife for self-defense for YOU not for your attacker.

You are correct that lethal force must be justified to pull a knife in the first place. However, you are neglecting some major things. If you kill with a knife, you are going to go in front of a jury of civilians who most likely will think of a knife as a more violent tool then a gun. They get to determine whether or not this murder was premeditated or not. Then, the prosecuter gets to dig up your background, and present that you were an expert in the martial arts, and in deadly knife arts. And, your weapon of choice happends to be a nasty looking 7 1/2 inch combat knife, that you carry on you all the time, hoping to be attacked so you can test your deadly art. If you don't think that this is what will happened, then you need to do some research on previous court cases.

You better have a team of very good attorneys to keep you out of jail with that one.

Then there is the issue of legalities. If what your carrying is illegal in your state, then you'll be charged with possession of a deadly weapon before you go on trial for murder. I'm sure that will trump any possabilites of getting bail before the case is tried murder, and it certianly won't help your case when you have to defend yourself from the prosectutors for murder.

I say the word "murder" a lot so that you'll all realize that if you kill someone in self-defense, you will go on trial for murder, regardless of how right you were. You will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not murder. You will have to prove that you tried every means available to get out of the violent situation before resorting to violence yourself, and that your intent was not to kill even when you resorted to violence.

If (and when I was) attacked, I don't want to kill my attacker if I can avoid it. Why? because I don't want to go on trial for murder. Secondly, I don't want to carry anything that will look to a jury like my actions were premeditated.

Now, I am sure some idiot will come on here and throw out a fun cliche' like, "It's better to be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Dur, dur, dur!" Sure, it's better to live and go through the courts then to die. However, if your self defense is almost gauranteed to land you in jail, when precautions can be taken to avoid that trip, then your self-defense isn't really self-defense at all. 

So, continue to carry "the biggest weapon possible," be my guest. I just hope that your kenpo class covers "prison @$$rape defense" as well as "biggest knife available" defense.  :uhyeah:


----------



## Cruentus (May 17, 2004)

Exception:

The only exception to carrying a large knife that I would say is if you lived in one of those small hunting/fishing towns where everyone carries a big knife as a tool, and it is LEGAL for your to carry such a tool (in Michigan you can carry a large knife, but you have to have a hunting or fishing license, and you have to be able to prove that you are indeed using it for utility purposes). I carry a larger tool in those circumstances. But, that's about it! 

 :asian:


----------



## KenpoTex (May 18, 2004)

Some good points Paul, however, let me clear up a few things.  Apparently I gave you the impression that I carry a bowie knife around on a daily basis.  In my first post on this thread regarding self-defense I made the statement that I carry the biggest/best weapons I can legally carry.  The knives I carry on a daily basis are all legal according to the laws of Missouri (4" or less).  Would I carry a 7" double-edged dagger if It was legal? Maybe, however since it is not I don't because I don't want to automatically ruin my case by carrying an illegal weapon (the same reason I don't carry a blackjack, a balisong, and a set of brass knuckles).  There is also the little fact that I have a degree in Criminal Justice and am in the process of trying to get on with the police department where I live...something that's not going to happen if I get busted for possession of a prohibited weapon.
  As I said before, I don't go around looking for trouble, nor do I ever want to be put into a position where I would be forced to kill someone.  Furthermore, if I was in a situation that warranted the use of lethal force, I would hope that I would be able to stop the guy w/o killing him.  However, due to the extrememly unpredictable nature of a fight, and the fact that you never know whether the guy is going to drop his knife and pull a gun, or whether he has a buddy just waiting to get a piece of you or whatever else you can think of I'm still going to try to end the situation as soon as possible.  This holds true for unarmed combat as well, I'm not going to stand there and spar with the guy, I'm going to hit him hard, fast, and nasty and continue to do so until he either no longer poses a threat or I have the opportunity to use my "run fu."

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, I just wanted to reiterate that I am not some rambo wannabe that's just looking for trouble.


----------



## OUMoose (May 18, 2004)

squirepens said:
			
		

> My opinion here is that with a small blade you can deal out a shitload of damage, but at the same time if you wanted to kill somebody you'd almost be FORCED to deliver the "coup de grace" as you put it. With the "largest, most powerful weapon" I can carry, it actually takes more effort NOT to kill the guy than it does to just kill him. And for people like myself who have a pretty strong aversion to killing, that's an important factor. If I can just hack him up without having to worry about killing him, I'm more likely to concentrate on the situation at hand, and less likely to "pull my punches" (or cuts) so to speak. I'm carrying a knife because I want a force multiplier, not because I want lethal force. If I wanted lethal force I'd carry a gun.
> 
> Squirepens bearer of the small knife



I'd rather not get caught up in the legal proceedings occuring above me here, but I'd just like to throw my 2cents in the hat.

You can deal out a sh*tload of damage with a big knife too, without worrying about killing, as long as you know where to hit.  As the ladies always tell me, "it's not the size of your weapon, it's how you use it."  

Hypothetical example:  You are in a confrontation with your small knife, and you "deal out a sh*tload" of damage, carving up his arms, legs, and torso, but not actually puncturing anything.  The Bracial and Femoral arteries are less than a 1/4" under the skin in their respective areas.  One (or both) get cut and the guy goes into shock from blood loss and dies.  What is the jury going to think then, when the guy is covered in slices and dices?  That you were trying to defend yourself, or trying to show off?

That's a very real possibility.  Heck, you don't even need a knife really (punch hard enough in the kidney region to induce shock comes to mind, if there are any boxers here to back me up). 

Another thing to think of is grip size.  Small knives have small grips.  Now, being a large guy, that teeny knife wouldn't feel comfortable, and would probably lead to sliping out of my hand, or poor blade control.  Just another thing to think about.  My personal favorite to this day is still the version 1 Spyderco Endura with the fully serrated blade.  Very comfortable in the hand, decent blade (4", AUS-6 steel), one-handed opening, belt clip on the right side...  and I payed $40 bucks for it almost 10 years ago (yes, I still have it and carry it when i'm going to an unfamilliar location).

If you're really worried about killing someone, a knife isn't the choice of weapons.  Find a nice ASP, a Kubaton (sp?), or some other blunt instrument.  Or perhaps a rock wherever you are... a stick?


----------

