# Weapon Retention



## MJS (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill started this thread in the GMA section.  A few of the posts caught my eye, with the mention of the badguy possibly taking away your weapon and using it against you.

So, I wanted to start this thread and discuss weapon retention.  Since many people carry a pocketknife or handgun, does anyone work on the retention of those tools?  IMO, I think that this is an important area.  I mean, if you're going to take the time to learn how to use the weapon, it'd be wise to also learn how to prevent it from being taken away from you.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

MJS said:


> Bill started this thread in the GMA section.  A few of the posts caught my eye, with the mention of the badguy possibly taking away your weapon and using it against you.
> 
> So, I wanted to start this thread and discuss weapon retention.  Since many people carry a pocketknife or handgun, does anyone work on the retention of those tools?  IMO, I think that this is an important area.  I mean, if you're going to take the time to learn how to use the weapon, it'd be wise to also learn how to prevent it from being taken away from you.



The only weapons retention training I've ever had is some training back in my MP days on how to retain or regain control of the police baton.  The nightstick is a good tool, but the first thing the bad guy does if you draw and do not immediately begin to hit him with it, is to grab it and try to take it away from you.  Hence, we learned some moves to try to keep control of it.

Other than that, no.  Although I do see the need.


----------



## Blindside (Oct 1, 2012)

We work both weapon retention and access.  As I have both officers who open carry firearms and civilians who carry either knives (openly, per WA state law) or firearms under concealed weapon permits, we do train for it regularly, but it is only under certain class functions.  Accessing backup weapons (say a folding knife) during sparring is becoming a regular event.  We have found that (and this should be obvious) "that if it is easier for you to access, it is easier for them to access."  Basically it is a complete PITA to get someone elses folding knife out of their pocket, but a sheath knife not so bad.  Body position of the carried item is important, 3/4 O'clock carry get accessed by the opponent far easier during a close range encounter than appendix or pocket carry.  Oh, we also found that Class III retention holsters work really well.  Most of this is done during a sparring environment.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

MJS said:


> it'd be wise to also learn how to prevent it from being taken away from you.



Not if you carry more than one and use it to throw at your opponent. I used to carry 3 throwing knifes. If I lost 2, I still have 1 left.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...w=192&start=0&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:0,i:99


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Not if you carry more than one and use it to throw at your opponent. I used to carry 3 throwing knifes.



As you are a new user, and I have been instructed not to thump on, harass, bend, fold, spindle, or otherwise terrify new users, may I say that is certainly a novel approach to self-defense, but are you certain it's legal where you live, to carry or to use?

Speaking only for myself, I would not wish to throw a weapon to my opponent for him to use on me.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> but are you certain it's legal where you live, to carry or to use?


 
That was back in Taiwan when I was young. In a place that firearm is not available, kinfe will be the next best weapon to have. If you know that most likely you have to deal with more than one opponent, knife throwing will give you some advantage.

I thought this is a MA form. To throw a dagger at your opponent's heart is no more violent than to use a samurai sword to cut your opponent's head off. Both are "illegal" in the modern world. There is no argument about that.


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Not if you carry more than one and use it to throw at your opponent. I used to carry 3 throwing knifes. If I lost 2, I still have 1 left.
> 
> http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...w=192&start=0&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:0,i:99



Nice belt! So I am wondering, since Mr. Mattocks brought it up, what is the current law in California for knife carriage?  I'm *fairly* certain throwing knives are illegal to carry.  Also - this is a bit of a twist on the *retention* factor.  May I ask if you carry a specific type of throwing knives and if one is more suitable for retentive use?

Thanks.


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That was back in Taiwan when I was young. In a place that firearm is not available, kinfe will be the next best weapon to have. If you know that most likely you have to deal with more than one opponent, knife throwing will give you some advantage.



I don't think I agree with your last statement, but could you explain your reasoning on this, please? Thanks!


----------



## Rich Parsons (Oct 1, 2012)

MJS said:


> Bill started this thread in the GMA section. A few of the posts caught my eye, with the mention of the badguy possibly taking away your weapon and using it against you.
> 
> So, I wanted to start this thread and discuss weapon retention. Since many people carry a pocketknife or handgun, does anyone work on the retention of those tools? IMO, I think that this is an important area. I mean, if you're going to take the time to learn how to use the weapon, it'd be wise to also learn how to prevent it from being taken away from you.



Yes we train weapon retention and access. The access comes later after the skill set is a little better, more of a personal way of teaching than anything scientific. 

I was working in a a seminar with a good friend who goes by the name of Paul. It was a grappling seminar. He asked if I had my trainer in my pocket. I told him yes. (* Note: We were both in street clothes as we were in the area for a different seminar on a different day and were invited to attend this one as well as guests. *) Paul said see if you can access it. Of course Paul and is trying to grab and hit me and basically make my day a bad one. So I pulled the training from my pocket which is a folder trainer. It also has a device that catches the pocket and opens on being pulled. It "SNAPPED" open and the seminar completely stopped. Paul and I were still wrestling as he realized I had it out he had to control it immediately. Of course he tried to strip or take it from me and we were going. I realized everyone was watching us and we stopped. The instructor said, "I should have known it was you two!" *All smiles, but shaking his head*. He went on to say, that no one was expected to train the way we did and that upon inspect the trainer was a trainer and safe for training on the floor. 

So yes I even use opportunities that pop up to practice and train. :~)


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> May I ask if you carry a specific type of throwing knives and if one is more suitable for retentive use?



Again, I was talking about when I was in Taiwan that firearm was not available. I'm not talking about California. I used to make my own throwing knifes. To make the blade is easy. The hard part is to make the handle. I collected some plastic bags, melt it into black glue, wrap it around the end of the blade, wait it to cool of, and use knife to make it into handle shape. This kind of handle will not break when drop on the ground.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> I don't think I agree with your last statement, but could you explain your reasoning on this, please? Thanks!



To throw a dagger, dart, steel ball, ... to hurt your enemy had been used in the ancient time before the hot weapon came up. There is nothing new there.


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Not if you carry more than one and use it to throw at your opponent. I used to carry 3 throwing knifes. If I lost 2, I still have 1 left.
> 
> http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...w=192&start=0&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:0,i:99


As the subject of this thread is weapon retention, which by necessity means some very close contact grappling in the BGs attempt to gain access to your weapon, I doubt throwing knives would be of much value. A secondary weapon? Yes. Hard to throw a knife from a tangled up position.


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

We sometimes work on weapons retention, as well as fouling the draw of the other person. Mixup who has weapons(one with, one without, both have weapons, two on one,etc.) All techniques applied force on force. Makes for an interesting afternoon.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

frank raud said:


> As the subject of this thread is weapon retention, which by necessity means some very close contact grappling in the BGs attempt to gain access to your weapon,...


Some weapon is hard for your opponent to take it away from you. If you put your middle finger into this ring, it will become part of your hand.

http://imageshack.us/a/img195/20/schook.jpg


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Some weapon is hard for your opponent to take it away from you. If you put your middle finger into this ring, it will become part of your hand.
> 
> http://imageshack.us/a/img195/20/schook.jpg



There are a number of knives like this where a finger-hole is included, but I tend to not like them as I would very much like to keep my fingers intact if possible.  That said I don't have much experience with these types of knives; can anyone who does please comment?


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Some weapon is hard for your opponent to take it away from you. If you put your middle finger into this ring, it will become part of your hand.
> 
> http://imageshack.us/a/img195/20/schook.jpg



But that is not a throwing knife, now is it? I am of course familiar with sunsetsu, edda koppo and variations of same, but that is not your original statement.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

frank raud said:


> But that is not a throwing knife, now is it? I am of course familiar with sunsetsu, edda koppo and variations of same, but that is not your original statement.



I don't want to side track discussion to throwing knife. Just try to bring it back to "Weapon Retention".


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I don't want to side track discussion to throwing knife. Just try to bring it back to "Weapon Retention".



It is not a side track at this point. As well, that style of weapon is difficult to access and get your finger into the ring under pressure, there is a reason why most weapon retention revolves around straps for retention, not small holes to place your fingers in. There is a reason they are historical curiousities.

So can you now explain how you throw a knife while grappling in an effort to retain your weapon?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

frank raud said:


> So can you now explain how you throw a knife while grappling in an effort to retain your weapon?


I was talking about long distance such as 15 feet apart. Most of the throwing weapons are different design than short distance wapon.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...w=136&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0,i:89


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Oct 1, 2012)

Rich Parsons said:


> Yes we train weapon retention and access. The access comes later after the skill set is a little better, more of a personal way of teaching than anything scientific.
> 
> I was working in a a seminar with a good friend who goes by the name of Paul. It was a grappling seminar. He asked if I had my trainer in my pocket. I told him yes. (* Note: We were both in street clothes as we were in the area for a different seminar on a different day and were invited to attend this one as well as guests. *) Paul said see if you can access it. Of course Paul and is trying to grab and hit me and basically make my day a bad one. So I pulled the training from my pocket which is a folder trainer. It also has a device that catches the pocket and opens on being pulled. It "SNAPPED" open and the seminar completely stopped. Paul and I were still wrestling as he realized I had it out he had to control it immediately. Of course he tried to strip or take it from me and we were going. I realized everyone was watching us and we stopped. The instructor said, "I should have known it was you two!" *All smiles, but shaking his head*. He went on to say, that no one was expected to train the way we did and that upon inspect the trainer was a trainer and safe for training on the floor.
> 
> So yes I even use opportunities that pop up to practice and train. :~)




Do you have any recommendations for a folder trainer? I might be interested in picking one up.


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I was talking about long distance such as 15 feet apart. Most of the throwing weapons are different design than short distance wapon.
> 
> http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...w=136&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0,i:89



As the thread is about weapon retention, can you possibly explain how someone 15 feet away is capable of taking your weapon away from you?


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Do you have any recommendations for a folder trainer? I might be interested in picking one up.



Spyderco has waved Delicas and Enduras, Emerson has trainer as well, lots of folks modify their Benchmade Griptillian trainers(Ghetto wave).


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 1, 2012)

frank raud said:


> As the thread is about weapon retention, can you possibly explain how someone 15 feet away is capable of taking your weapon away from you?



The throwing knife has nothing to do with weapon retention. How many time do I have to repeat this?

I started it as a "joke" to indicate that if you have many, if you lose one, you will still have some left. Please don't get too serious about this "side track". 

If you have many wives, after one leaves you, you will still have some left. Please don't ask me whether the state of California allows to have multiple wives or not. I like to joke around. Life is too short to be too serious.


----------



## shesulsa (Oct 1, 2012)

Indeed, let's drift back to retention.

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Aiki Lee (Oct 1, 2012)

frank raud said:


> Spyderco has waved Delicas and Enduras, Emerson has trainer as well, lots of folks modify their Benchmade Griptillian trainers(Ghetto wave).



I use the spyderco and think it is very much worth the higher price.

We train on weapon retention about the same amount with edged weapon and firearms. I think anyone who plans to carry such a thing needs to know how to hold onto it. Especially if you are in law enforcement.


----------



## Blindside (Oct 1, 2012)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Do you have any recommendations for a folder trainer? I might be interested in picking one up.



I carry an Emerson, but Emerson doesn't make a trainer in my blade style so I bought one of these:
http://www.bladehq.com/item--Boker-Plus-Jim-Wagner--2980

And zip-tie waved it.  It provides a good size comparison to my knife but the "remote opening feature" fails more often, that isn't a bad thing in a training knife IMO, I have to be able to open the knife without that feature as well.  Oh, and it is about half the price of an equivelant trainer from SpyderCo or 1/3 the price of an Emerson trainer.


----------



## frank raud (Oct 1, 2012)

Himura Kenshin said:


> I use the spyderco and think it is very much worth the higher price.
> 
> We train on weapon retention about the same amount with edged weapon and firearms. I think anyone who plans to carry such a thing needs to know how to hold onto it. Especially if you are in law enforcement.


I recently took a workshop from TDI utilising their knife(Kabar TDI law enforcement knife). Interesting to use a purpose built knife, designed for off hand use to protect your firearm. Also cool to get factory training on a knife.


----------



## arnisador (Oct 1, 2012)

We do a lot of stick retention--what if he grabs your stick?--but not so much on knife. I have never used a lanyard or finger-hole--I don't want it used against me--but knives get dropped more often than people think.


----------



## arnisador (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Speaking only for myself, I would not wish to throw a weapon to my opponent for him to use on me.



It's the Sayoc Kali approach. They carry 20+ knives/darts--I'm not exaggerating--in specially-designed rigs, and if an encounter seems imminent a standard plan is to charge forward, hurling knives/darts constantly to keep the foe dodging until you get close-in and can attack with a held knife. Then, whenever there's a danger of being disarmed you drop it (or fling it at the opponent, if possible) rather than fighting for retention, and access another one with your other hand immediately. It's meant to be an overwhelming attack that doesn't give the other guy a chance to use your dropped weapon against you. Their motto is: "I have the knife."


----------



## PoolMan (Oct 2, 2012)

Interesting video on weapon retention by Sensei James Williams. There are other good ones as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6VjH0TfsQo&playnext=1&list=PL7EDAA2AC18270707&feature=results_video

On the subject of knife throwing, which I have practiced for many years, I would only do it in a self-defense situation as a LAST resort. Most people, even those who practice knife throwing, will have a very small probability of hitting a target in self-defense. This is simply because of two reasons. 1 - most knife throwing practioners practice with throwing knives, which are balanced for throwing. The knives they carry though are most likely folders which are not balanced at all. 2 - most practioners use a rotational throwing method, and stand a set distance from there target. This does not duplicate in any way a real life and death situation. If you are going to practice knife throwing and have any hope of defending yourself by throwing a knife learn the spear-style way of throwing. And even then, keep your knife in your hand where it belongs.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Oct 2, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Some weapon is hard for your opponent to take it away from you. If you put your middle finger into this ring, it will become part of your hand.
> 
> http://imageshack.us/a/img195/20/schook.jpg



That's a wicked looking knife!


----------



## MJS (Oct 2, 2012)

There's a small portion that we have in our FMA classes, mainly defending the stick, however, I've worked it a bit more in depth, during private training, which also included the blade.  Blindside made some great points, when talking about the ease of accessing your weapon.  Definately important to keep body position in mind, as he said, so as to a) make it easier for you to get to your weapon and b) to make it harder for someone else to reach it.  

As far as carrying multiple weapons and throwing one...IMO, I'd rather not toss away a weapon, on the assumption that I may get lucky and actually hit the guy.  Furthermore, unless the knife is designed for it, throwing your average pocket knife probably isn't going to get the desired results anyways.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 2, 2012)

The most common technique to prevent your opponent from pulling out his knife or gun is to not allow his right hand to reach to his pocket. In order to do so, you can use the top of your right palm edge to strike inside of his right elbow joint. This will force his right arm to bend outward and make his right hand further away from his right pocket. You then use your left hand to push on the back of his right palm and move his right hand behind his back. This way his right hand will be even further away from his pocket.

If the knife or gun is already in your opponent's hand, the best chance is to "crack" his elbow joint if you can.

Here is an old clip to show some possible skill how to deal with arm robbery. It was from 8mm film so there is no sound.


----------



## mook jong man (Oct 2, 2012)

In my country it is illegal to carry a knife , so I spend a lot of time training with the stick and improvised weapons.
A very useful exercise is to start off  in close quarters , with one guy slowly  going through his various stick strikes to the head and body , using either a double or single grip .

The other guys job is to do his best to try and stop the strikes and grab the stick with one or both hands.
I generally find that a technique called "kayaking" either forward or reverse  seems to effect a quick release from most of the stick grabs , it's called "kayaking" because it mimics the action of someone paddling through the water in a kayak.
It works by putting a lot of pressure on the wrists of the person grabbing the stick ,so they either let go or get their wrists broken.

The exercise can be ramped up in intensity by instead of the person just grabbing the stick , they will now try and grab the stick and throw various punches at you with their free hand , so now you have to try and "kayak" out of the grab and block or redirect their punch with your stick.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 2, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Speaking only for myself, I would not wish to throw a weapon to my opponent for him to use on me.


If my opponent has time to pick the weapon up off the ground (or out of his torso) and use it against me, then I did something wrong.  Throwing a knife (or other thrown weapon) isn't like in the movies.  It's not intended to immediately incapacitate or kill.  It's a distraction, a "cover" so that I can either close range, keep him busy while delivering another attack, or escape.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 2, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> I don't think I agree with your last statement, but could you explain your reasoning on this, please? Thanks!


Having a distance/force-projection weapon allows you to have stand off ability, to force range out and into a more safe distance, and to attack from a greater distance away.  It also allows the option of creating distractions, covering actions, and forces the opponent to deal with one attack while another may be in the offing.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 2, 2012)

frank raud said:


> As the subject of this thread is weapon retention, which by necessity means some very close contact grappling in the BGs attempt to gain access to your weapon, I doubt throwing knives would be of much value. A secondary weapon? Yes. Hard to throw a knife from a tangled up position.


From clinch range, no probably not.  Why would you.  From anything out farther away than body clashing range, then yeah.

Using thrown weapons in dueling, personal combat, and group/military combat is a very old and well documented practice.  Yes, they can miss or be dodged.  I came across one very old story documenting a duel between American Indians.  The two were both equipped with a Tomahawk and a Knife.  Both threw their 'hawks at each other.  Both missed.  The second one used the throw as a distraction to cover his advance into knife range.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 2, 2012)

arnisador said:


> It's the Sayoc Kali approach. They carry 20+ knives/darts--I'm not exaggerating--in specially-designed rigs, and if an encounter seems imminent a standard plan is to charge forward, hurling knives/darts constantly to keep the foe dodging until you get close-in and can attack with a held knife. Then, whenever there's a danger of being disarmed you drop it (or fling it at the opponent, if possible) rather than fighting for retention, and access another one with your other hand immediately. It's meant to be an overwhelming attack that doesn't give the other guy a chance to use your dropped weapon against you. Their motto is: "I have the knife."


I've seen it in a lot of various martial systems.  I've seen it in a Silat form that a friend did.  I've seen throwing weapons in American Indian confrontations.  Throwing weapons existed in Medieval Europe and in Greek and Roman military combat.  I've seen Indian (asian) throwing ax/knives (look like some steel antler or something).

Yes, the rule was always, "have more than one."  

I don't want to be rude to other posters  (all of whom I respect) but I wonder at the comments of modern martial artists.  We know for a fact that previous generations threw weapons.  It's indisputable.  We're not that much smarter than they were so if we can figure out that we shouldn't throw our only weapon, they must have.  Because they threw weapons, they must have, for some reason, not been worried about the thrown weapon being used against them (or maybe they expected it... anyone ever read "Who's Afraid of Beowulf"?  

I digress.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 2, 2012)

Here is a nice knife throwling clip:

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzI2NjA5NzI=.html


----------



## lklawson (Oct 2, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is a nice knife throwling clip:
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzI2NjA5NzI=.html


He's using the half-turn method.  It's fine for what he's doing but I don't think it's optimal for "combat" throwing.  I agree with "PoolMan" in that the "spear" style is more appropriate for this.  Assuming, that is, that he and I are talking the same thing. I recall seeing it as any number of terms.  I like the "Direct Hit" method for a name.  






(http://www.secrets-of-shuriken.com.au/principles.htm)



> [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Fig. 33. Late release, and    turning the palm, for close targets.
> 
> [/FONT]
> 
> ...



Of course there are the half turn, multiple turns, etc.  But I think this is the best for what we're talking about.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## arnisador (Oct 2, 2012)

One point on the earlier prevalence of throwing weapons--we should also remember, as Andre the Giant tried to teach us in The Princess bride, that group tactics and individual tactics are different. That's part of the reason; e.g., archers make sense with infantry but less sense in the complete absence thereof. But I fundamentally agree--they've been used because they work, and these people fought to survive more often than we do.


----------



## PoolMan (Oct 2, 2012)

That is exactly what I am talking about "lklawson". The "Thorn" Or "Spear" style of knife throwing. Here is a clip of Ralph Thorn's video from Paladin Press.








lklawson said:


> He's using the half-turn method.  It's fine for what he's doing but I don't think it's optimal for "combat" throwing.  I agree with "PoolMan" in that the "spear" style is more appropriate for this.  Assuming, that is, that he and I are talking the same thing. I recall seeing it as any number of terms.  I like the "Direct Hit" method for a name.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## WC_lun (Oct 3, 2012)

If you have a throwing weapon and know how to use it and the effect it will likely have on an attacker, then I got no problem with it.  As an excercise that might be an eye opening experience, have a training partner come at you the moment you go for your throwing knife.  Remember, if you throw before threatened you will be the aggressor and probably charged with assault. See how long it takes to complete the motion and how close your training partner can get before you can complete the throwing motion.  Try this at different ranges.  If you haven't done this excercise when training with thrown weapons, you are not prepared to use those weapons in real combat.  Yes, thrown weapons can be effective, but not if thier use is based upon false training or fantastical stories, not that any of the proponents of thrown weapons here fit those descriptors.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 3, 2012)

WC_lun said:


> have a training partner come at you the moment you go for your throwing knife.



The throwing knife is one of many &#26263;&#22120;(An Qi) that used in the ancient time. &#26263;(An) is dark and &#22120;(Qi) is tool. The "dark tool" means you should use only when your opponent cannot see it. Invisibility is the key.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
&#25152;&#35586;&#26263;&#22120;&#65292;&#26159;&#25351;&#37027;&#31278;&#20415;&#26044;&#22312;&#26263;&#20013;&#23526;&#26045;&#31361;&#35186;&#30340;&#20853;&#22120;&#12290;&#26263;&#22120;&#22823;&#22810;&#26159;&#27494;&#26519;&#20013;&#20154;&#21109;&#36896;&#20986;&#20358;&#30340;&#65292;&#23427;&#20497;&#39636;&#31309;&#23567;&#65292;&#37325;&#37327;&#36629;&#65292;&#20415;&#26044;&#25884;&#24118;&#65292;&#22823;&#22810;&#26377;&#23574;&#26377;&#20995;&#65292;&#21487;&#20197;&#25842;&#20986;&#21313;&#24190;&#31859;&#20035;&#33267;&#24190;&#21313;&#31859;&#20043;&#36960;&#65292;&#36895;&#24230;&#24555;&#65292;&#38577;&#34109;&#24615;&#24375;&#65292;&#31561;&#26044;&#24120;&#35215;&#20853;&#20995;&#30340;&#22823;&#24133;&#24230;&#24310;&#20280;&#65292;&#20855;&#26377;&#36611;&#22823;&#23041;&#21147;&#12290;
The so-called "Anqi" refers to that kind of makes it easier to carry out raids in secret weapons. Anqi is mostly created by man in the martial arts, their small size, light weight, easy to carry, most have sharp cutting edges, can be thrown out a dozen or even dozens of meters away, speed, invisibility is strong, substantial extension of the conventional blade, with larger power. 





WC_lun said:


> If you haven't done this excercise when training with thrown weapons, you are not prepared to use those weapons in real combat.


If you have not had affair with a woman in her house when her husband is home, you are not prepared to have real affair. Sorry! It's just a joke. Don't take it serious. But you may get my point from this joke.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 3, 2012)

I don't want to be seen as insulting any particular style.  I admit my first reaction to the notion of people carrying around throwing knives for the purpose of self-defense in today's society was to laugh.  I apologize for that.

However, I would like to point something out.  In terms of legal self-defense in the United States, I do not believe throwing knives have a place used as such.

Why?

Because unlike a gun, or a knife as a stabbing/slashing weapon, a throwing knife must be thrown.  To do that, there must be distance between the assailant and the victim who is doing the throwing.

The notion has been expressed in this thread that this is exactly what a person armed with throwing knives does in self-defense; they break contact and create distance, then chuck knives at the assailant.

And this is where, I believe, the notion of LEGAL self-defense breaks down, at least as applied in the USA.

One of our basic notions about self-defense is that it is legal when a person is in great bodily danger.  Some states require a victim to attempt to leave first; others do not require it ('stand your ground' laws, etc).  But in every case I can think of, if you create the necessary distance between yourself and your assailant before you begin whipping knives at him, you are no longer in the same danger you were in prior to creating that distance.

In other words, if you can run away far enough to throw knives at him, you can just keep running instead.

Personally, I have never heard of someone in the US defending themselves with throwing knives.  I guess that doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but frankly, I think the entire notion is in the realm of fantasy.  I'm not saying a person can't throw knives accurately, or that it's not an established part of some martial arts, so I am not putting it down; I'm just saying that I don't think it would fly as an appropriate response to an attack in a real-life self-defense situation in the USA.

Sorry, but I could not keep pretending that this kind of fantasy has any place in reality.  My apologies if I am offending anyone, I'm not trying to.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Oct 3, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> There are a number of knives like this where a finger-hole is included, but I tend to not like them as I would very much like to keep my fingers intact if possible. That said I don't have much experience with these types of knives; can anyone who does please comment?



I agree, as most do not have a hole large enough for my fingers. And secondly, those who know small joint locks and strips will break your finger and or hand. So I guess it is who are you training against for retention and the skill set you a re looking for.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Oct 3, 2012)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Do you have any recommendations for a folder trainer? I might be interested in picking one up.


There are many out there, and it is a trainer so it will get damaged. I have the Emerson Wave Trainer as I also have a couple of Emerson Wave knives. See how I got the trainer that matched what I would carry or use, so I could practice as if I had my real blade. That being said the Emersn Trainers are about the same price as the blades which is over $100 which puts it out of the question for most people. 

1) What do you plan to carry or use?
2) Find something as close as possible to that so your training will be appropriate
3) Look for similar thumb opening devices as your preferred blade. 
4) Be willing to recognize that what you bought does not meet your needs and look for other options. 

Good Luck.

*** Edit: I was not able to find the Emerson Trainer in a quick search, maybe they have stopped making them. ***


----------



## Rich Parsons (Oct 3, 2012)

lklawson said:


> He's using the half-turn method. It's fine for what he's doing but I don't think it's optimal for "combat" throwing. I agree with "PoolMan" in that the "spear" style is more appropriate for this. Assuming, that is, that he and I are talking the same thing. I recall seeing it as any number of terms. I like the "Direct Hit" method for a name.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was in New Zealand for work in 1999 and practicing my dart throwing with techniques like this also for blades and such. Others had no clue and it was a way to practice something in the garage area without getting any attention.


----------



## WC_lun (Oct 3, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you have not had affair with a woman in her house when her husband is home, you are not prepared to have real affair. Sorry! It's just a joke. Don't take it serious. But you may get my point from this joke.



I'm not upset about your comment, but I don't understand it either.  I wasn't saying to actually throw knives at someone. Maybe its just a miscommunication thing  

Have you trained with some focus on using the different ranges with the weapon?  If not, then it would be just as useless as someone training kicks only at kicking range, never having to adjust for a moving and/or aggresive opponent.  You may have powerful kicks, but do them in the incorrect range and it will negate thier effectiveness. Many students mistakenly believe that just the presence of a weapon in thier hands is an "I win button."  While it is certainly true that a weapon changes things in an encounter, a weapon does not change the basics of fighting as in range, timing, force, structure, etc are still applicable.  The difference is that if you mess up, the resulting harm is going to be much greater.

Bill's post is excellent in his pointing out the laws here in the States.  These things must be thought about when addressing weapon use.  A person has a right to defend themselves, but there is a line that can be crossed easily where it is no longer self defense.  A student needs to understand that intimately or face criminal charges when his self defense situation changes to assault.  Teaching a student weapon use without knowing the repurcussions is irresponsable of an instructor, in my opinion.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> However, I would like to point something out.  In terms of legal self-defense in the United States, I do not believe throwing knives have a place used as such.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because unlike a gun, or a knife as a stabbing/slashing weapon, a throwing knife must be thrown.  To do that, there must be distance between the assailant and the victim who is doing the throwing.


Pretty much like using a gun.  Guns are "distance weapons" too.  While they can be used at "contact range" they are distance weapons and that's what they're best at.  Similarly, a "throwing knife" is just a knife that, by physical design, is well suited for throwing.  However, it can also be used at "contact range."



> The notion has been expressed in this thread that this is exactly what a person armed with throwing knives does in self-defense; they break contact and create distance, then chuck knives at the assailant.


Not necessarily.  Distance weapons are for using "at distance." It doesn't matter if they are used pre-contact or post-contact.



> And this is where, I believe, the notion of LEGAL self-defense breaks down, at least as applied in the USA.
> 
> One of our basic notions about self-defense is that it is legal when a  person is in great bodily danger.  Some states require a victim to  attempt to leave first; others do not require it ('stand your ground'  laws, etc).  But in every case I can think of, if you create the  necessary distance between yourself and your assailant before you begin  whipping knives at him, you are no longer in the same danger you were in  prior to creating that distance.


There are any number of times when a distance weapon can be legally deployed.  "Contact" is not required, only the reasonable belief that the assailant intends to do immediate great bodily harm to the victim or an innocent third party.  One very simple way of fulfilling this requirement is if the assailant deploys his own distance weapon (gun?).  Another would be if the assailant were making verbal threats and then deployed (or reasonably appeared to be in the process of deploying) a weapon while advancing toward the defender.  Several others, but you get the idea.



> In other words, if you can run away far enough to throw knives at him, you can just keep running instead.


Unless you can't run for some reason.  Maybe I'm trapped.  Maybe I'm outnumbered and can't escape.  Maybe I have innocent third parties to be concerned about (family?).  Maybe I just can't run faster for whatever reason.  Further, I should point out that most of these "combat throwing" techniques are actually pretty close range; well under the 21' Tueller Drill distance.



> Personally, I have never heard of someone in the US defending themselves with throwing knives.


Me neither.  But I know of several self defense experts that teach it, including at least one (retired) LEO.



> I guess that doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but frankly, I think the entire notion is in the realm of fantasy.


Personally, I'd rather have a gun.  They're easier to operate, and tend to be more effective at stopping attacks.  That said, there are any number of places that I can't carry a gun but I can carry a knife that, while not optimally suited to throwing, I can make work well enough at sub-21' ranges.



> I'm not saying a person can't throw knives accurately, or that it's not an established part of some martial arts, so I am not putting it down; I'm just saying that I don't think it would fly as an appropriate response to an attack in a real-life self-defense situation in the USA.


I think it's a valid potential study for self defense.  I just don't think it should be high on the list of "study this first" items.



> Sorry, but I could not keep pretending that this kind of fantasy has any place in reality.  My apologies if I am offending anyone, I'm not trying to.


Nah.  It has its place.  It's not fantasy.  It's just that it should be, in my opinion, a secondary study, maybe tertiary.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 3, 2012)

WC_lun said:


> Bill's post is excellent in his pointing out the laws here in the States.  These things must be thought about when addressing weapon use.  A person has a right to defend themselves, but there is a line that can be crossed easily where it is no longer self defense.  A student needs to understand that intimately or face criminal charges when his self defense situation changes to assault.  Teaching a student weapon use without knowing the repurcussions is irresponsable of an instructor, in my opinion.


I disagree.

If you're going to engage in self defense, either unarmed or with ANY weapon at all, the rules just don't change.  Your actions must pass the "Reasonable Man" sniff-test.  It doesn't matter with what or how you defend yourself, if you're using Deadly Force, then then a "Reasonable Man" must believe that you were in fear of death or serious bodily harm to yourself or an innocent third party.  Once the justification for Deadly Force is established, it doesn't matter (legally) one whit what method was used to employ Deadly Force.  It could be a knife, stick, gun, or improvised weapon.  That's what matters.

For every one of my students, whether we're discussing weapons or unarmed, I tell them that if they are going to employ Deadly Force then it must be justified and then I describe, briefly, what "justified" means.  Seriously, if you're teaching deadly force (chokes? throws that land on top of the head?) then it doesn't matter if it's with weapons or not.  Deadly Force is Deadly Force.  That's why courts recognize "Disparity of Force" as a justification for employing Deadly Force (Disparity of Force = think of a mob attack against an individual or the classic Linebacker Vs. Old Lady).  Remember, the most common way of dieing from a general brawl is falling (or being thrown/tripped) and hitting the head on a hard surface (concrete?).

At some point you either recognize that everything you teach could potentially be deadly and you have to trust your students or you have frequent and reoccurring lectures about Justifiable Deadly Force.

So, really, it doesn't matter if you defend yourself with a thrown knife, a gun, or your raw awesomeness (like me. )  As long as it's Justified, you're in the clear.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 3, 2012)

lklawson said:


> Pretty much like using a gun.  Guns are "distance weapons" too.  While they can be used at "contact range" they are distance weapons and that's what they're best at.  Similarly, a "throwing knife" is just a knife that, by physical design, is well suited for throwing.  However, it can also be used at "contact range."



Yes, I agree that a 'throwing knife' can be used as a stabbing or cutting weapon.  The person who brought it up did so in reference carrying a bunch of them around and hurling them at an assailant, and it is that I am responding to.



> Not necessarily.  Distance weapons are for using "at distance." It doesn't matter if they are used pre-contact or post-contact.



Yes, it really does, in terms of legal self-defense.  Imagine a person with a pistol carried for self defense.  He is attacked, and runs fifty feet away, takes aim, and shoots his attacker.  Unless the attacker is likewise armed with a firearm and still represents a threat to him, he is NOT in danger of immediate death or serious bodily injury, and he does NOT have the legal right to employ deadly force in self-defense in any jurisdiction that I am aware of.  By removing himself from the threat of being cut, stabbed, punched, clubbed, or etc, he is no longer in imminent danger.  If the attacker has a firearm, of course, that may be different.  But then I would question what kind of person would attack a man with a gun by throwing knives at him.



> There are any number of times when a distance weapon can be legally deployed.  "Contact" is not required, only the reasonable believe that the assailant intends to do immediate great bodily harm to the victim or an innocent third party.  One very simple way of fulfilling this requirement is if the assailant deploys his own distance weapon (gun?).  Another would be if the assailant were making verbal threats and then deployed (or reasonably appeared to be in the process of deploying) a weapon while advancing toward the defender.  Several others, but you get the idea.



No, that is absolutely untrue.  Reasonable belief has to be grounded in reality, and it is not up to the victim to decide what 'reasonable' is.  From a distance, a person cannot punch, slice, stab, or club you.  He can perhaps shoot you - in which case you would absolutely reasonable in believing your life was in imminent danger.  But again, chucking knives at a man who is armed with a gun and trying to shoot you?  While legal, probably not as wise as trying very hard to escape might be.



> Unless you can't run for some reason.  Maybe I'm trapped.  Maybe I'm outnumbered and can't escape.  Maybe I have innocent third parties to be concerned about (family?).  Maybe I just can't run faster for whatever reason.  Further, I should point out that most of these "combat throwing" techniques are actually pretty close range; well under the 21' Tueller Drill distance.



Interesting scenarios.  Have any of these ever resulted in a person defending themselves by throwing knives at an assailant?  I get your point (no pun intended), but it seems so far-fetched as to strain credulity.



> Me neither.  But I know of several self defense experts that teach it, including at least one (retired) LEO.



If you pay me enough, I'll teach it too.  Doesn't make it a valid self-defense technique.



> Personally, I'd rather have a gun.  They're easier to operate, and tend to be more effective at stopping attacks.  That said, there are any number of places that I can't carry a gun but I can carry a knife that, while not optimally suited to throwing, I can make work well enough at sub-21' ranges.



Just me personally - I would never, never, throw a weapon at a person.  The chances they would then use it on me are too frightening to even contemplate.



> I think it's a valid potential study for self defense.  I just don't think it should be high on the list of "study this first" items.
> 
> Nah.  It has its place.  It's not fantasy.  It's just that it should be, in my opinion, a secondary study, maybe tertiary.



The person who brought this up stated it as his normal method (years ago, as he said) of carry for self-defense weaponry.  That does indeed strike me as bizarre, fantasy, outlandish, odd, potentially illegal, and probably foolish.  I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but come on.  We get the occasional person on MT who talks about carrying around eggs full of ground up glass and pockets full of sand and so on. All are rightly pointed out to be fantasy nonsense in terms of practical, real-life, self-defense situations.  At a certain point, although I respect all martial arts traditions, I have to say woah up there pardner, that's just crazy talk.  If everything is OK, then nothing is NOT OK.  And carrying around a brace of throwing knives as self-defense?  Not OK.  Sorry, I have to say that.


----------



## WC_lun (Oct 3, 2012)

lk, I assume that you teach some sort of responsibilty in your hand to hand combat.  Your students probably understand because they train with other people and probably get to know on some level the repurcussions of both employing thier skills correctly and when they fail to do so on some level.  For example, if I drop my hands in an engagement, I am probably gonna take one to the noggin.  With many, many, instructors who teach martial weapons, that very important training is lacking.  It is understandable, since weapons can be so dangerous.  However, the student does not experience what happens when they do stuff correctly or not.  The result is that these students do not have a realistic understanding of the weapon work itself, nor the repurcussions of employing a weapon, even if everything happens perfectly.  It is one thing to train in knife use in a nice safe enviroment where no one gets injured or arrested, but quite another to see a bloody mess because you actually did your technique correctly. It is also eye opening to sit in the back of a cop car handcuffed, when you were the one who was attacked.  It is very important that students understand the reality of thier actions.  Weapon work has repurcussions that a student needs to know if taking up that kind of training.  This type of escalated violence is NOT the same as what TV shows and movies potray.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 3, 2012)

lklawson said:


> If you're going to engage in self defense, either unarmed or with ANY weapon at all, the rules just don't change.  Your actions must pass the "Reasonable Man" sniff-test.  It doesn't matter with what or how you defend yourself, if you're using Deadly Force, then then a "Reasonable Man" must believe that you were in fear of death or serious bodily harm to yourself or an innocent third party.  Once the justification for Deadly Force is established, it doesn't matter (legally) one whit what method was used to employ Deadly Force.  It could be a knife, stick, gun, or improvised weapon.  That's what matters.



I agree with that.  My belief is that if you can extricate yourself and run far enough away to create the distance necessary to throw knives at your assailant, you are most likely (unless the opponent is shooting at your or threatening to) no longer inside that 'reasonable man' test realm.  



> For every one of my students, whether we're discussing weapons or unarmed, I tell them that if they are going to employ Deadly Force then it must be justified and then I describe, briefly, what "justified" means.  Seriously, if you're teaching deadly force (chokes? throws that land on top of the head?) then it doesn't matter if it's with weapons or not.  Deadly Force is Deadly Force.  That's why courts recognize "Disparity of Force" as a justification for employing Deadly Force (Disparity of Force = think of a mob attack against an individual or the classic Linebacker Vs. Old Lady).  Remember, the most common way of dieing from a general brawl is falling (or being thrown/tripped) and hitting the head on a hard surface (concrete?).
> 
> At some point you either recognize that everything you teach could potentially be deadly and you have to trust your students or you have frequent and reoccurring lectures about Justifiable Deadly Force.
> 
> ...



As long as it is justified, yes.  I just don't see that happening in many circumstances where one has the ability to run away, then turn and throw knives from a distance.  Although I can create such scenarios in my mind, I have to believe that in real life, it just doesn't happen.  Going about armed with a bandoleer of throwing knives as a primary self-defense weapon is just...wrong...to my way of thinking.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 3, 2012)

If we look at this from a different angle, you may not want to throw knife at your opponent, but you can't prevent your opponent from throwing knife at you. In Fu Su-Nan's book "Father and son in Jang Hu", 

http://www.amazon.cn/~/dp/B007A6Y2LA

his father got into a fight against many guys. When those guys started to throw rocks at his father, his father ended in hostipal. His father told his friends who visted him, "My TCMA teacher didn't teach me how to dodge rocks throwing."

When I was in high school, after the TCMA training, we liked to play a game. We drew a circle on the ground. One guy stood in that circle, 4 guys threw tennis balls at him. If any tennis ball hit him, he was out. That was the way I learned how to dodge "rock (or knife) throwing". Do people still train such skill today, I have not seen any.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 3, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we look at this from a different angle, you may not want to throw knife at your opponent, but you can't prevent your opponent from throwing knife at you. In Fu Su-Nan's book "Father and son in Jang Hu",
> 
> http://www.amazon.cn/~/dp/B007A6Y2LA
> 
> ...



I guess it has happened, but I sincerely doubt that it happens much in self-defense situations:

http://blogs.bellinghamherald.com/d...-scanner-traffic-notes-from-morning-of-may-9/



> May 9th, 2012 5 PM PST by caleb - The Bellingham Herald
> By Caleb Hutton
> Via scanner traffic:
> About 7:30 a.m., police responded to a report of domestic violence where a man threw a knife at another man. The suspect then ran to the nearby Shell Station at 3970 Meridian St. He was apparently mad because he thought the assault victim and a woman had stolen money from him. Police were canvassing the area looking for him, but I don&#8217;t see him listed in the jail roster yet. Didn&#8217;t sound like the victim was badly hurt. We&#8217;ll try to get a full story on this later.
> ...



In any case, I have a little trouble imagining a modern-day self-defense news item that would involve both the assailant and the victim tossing knives at each other.  Anything could happen, I remember reading somewhere about a man who defended himself from a home invader with a spear gun he kept for spearfishing.  But I doubt I would train to use a spear gun on the off chance I might find myself needing to use one for self-defense.

As far as the game you described, the only thing I can think of that is similar to it is the childhood game of 'Dodgeball'.  But it's done with inflated rubber balls, not rocks or knives.  In our dojo, the kids are sometimes allowed to play a version of it which involves tennis-ball sized soft fluffy balls that cannot hurt anyone; it allows them to work off excess energy and builds teamwork and teaches balance and coordination and even strategy to some extent.  Again, not something we do often, and doesn't involve rocks or knives.

But we train with serious weapons in our dojo.  We do train with bo and tonfa and sai.  But we don't carry them around on the street with us for self-defense purposes.  Some of the skills might be useful in self-defense, but we don't throw any of our weapons, either.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I have a little trouble imagining a modern-day self-defense news item that would involve both the assailant and the victim tossing knives at each other.


When the hot weapon had replaced the cold weapon, many things had changed. In 21th centry, should we still train:

- short weapon such as single edge knife, double edge sword, ...?
- long weapon such as staff, spear, Guan Dao, ...?
- throwing weapons?
- dodge throwing weapons?
- 1 against many fights?
- many against many fight?
- ...

If we don't train those skills, it will be lost in the future generation. If we do, it may not have much usage in the modern world.

I used to have a 2 sections staff that one part is longer than the other. When your opponent uses his shield to block it, the short section will go over the shield and still hit on his head. It's excellent weapon to be used to against a shield. Does it have any place in the modern world? May be not!

http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/asianwave/ms070318a1.html


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 3, 2012)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When the hot weapon had replaced the cold weapon, many things had changed. In 21th centry, should we still train:
> 
> - short weapon such as single edge knife, double edge sword, ...?
> - long weapon such as staff, spear, Guan Dao, ...?
> ...



I understand the concept of training with obsolete weapons.  I do it myself as a student.  I just don't think I would wander the streets with a pair of sai tucked into my belt.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 4, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Yes, it really does, in terms of legal self-defense.


No, it really doesn't.  Remember, I said, "Distance weapons are for using "at distance." It doesn't matter if they are used pre-contact or post-contact."  That was in response to your statement that if the attacker is pushed back or breaks contact for some reason then the attack is no longer there.  This may be true in some cases but is also not true in many others.  Direct physical contact is often broken in altercations when one party is pushed back or decides to gain a little space.  The attacker may very well still be a threat even though he does not have a grasp on the victim.



> Imagine a person with a pistol carried for self defense.  He is attacked, and runs fifty feet away, takes aim, and shoots his attacker.


Why would I imagine that?  It doesn't match anything I've suggested to now.  Might as well imagine the attacker runs 100 yards away.  It has no bearing on my points.  Just because the attacker has been backed up some, doesn't mean the attack is no longer imminent.  Standard Self Defense and LEO dogma suggests that a person is a valid threat up to 21 feet and sometimes beyond, even when they have no distance weapon and is commonly represented in the oft cited Tueller Drill.  This is just a fact of life.  I'm not sure where the idea of 50 feet came from.



> By removing himself from the threat of being cut, stabbed, punched, clubbed, or etc, he is no longer in imminent danger.  If the attacker has a firearm, of course, that may be different.


I agree.  The question is, "how far away is 'removed'?"  I'm suggesting that it's a lot farther than you seem realize, though maybe not since I think it's probably a lot closer than 50 feet.  Nevertheless, back to my points, there can still be a valid threat of immediate bodily harm 1) before contact is made, 2) after contact has been broken 3) and even at some small distance.



> But then I would question what kind of person would attack a man with a gun by throwing knives at him.


When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.  The point is, of course I agree (as I've already said) a firearm is a superior tool for distance self defense.  But there are any number of reasons why a victim might not have a firearm and, in those cases, using a thrown weapon of some sort is a darn sight better than peeing my pants and crying like a little girl.  



> No, that is absolutely untrue.  Reasonable belief has to be grounded in reality, and it is not up to the victim to decide what 'reasonable' is.  From a distance, a person cannot punch, slice, stab, or club you.  He can perhaps shoot you - in which case you would absolutely reasonable in believing your life was in imminent danger.  But again, chucking knives at a man who is armed with a gun and trying to shoot you?  While legal, probably not as wise as trying very hard to escape might be.


Yes, actually, it is quite legal.  Perhaps, at this point, we are having a difficulty with terminology.  When I write "reasonable," I am referring to the legal construct known as a "Reasonable Man."  It is a fictitious person that a Jury or some other group develops from their legal advice and personal experience to compare actions against.  The question is always, "Would a 'Reasonable Man' have believed what the Defendant says he believed with the same information and would that 'Reasonable Man' have been justified in taking the same actions?"  "Reasonable" in this case automatically assumes that the Defendant is not suffering from delusions and is otherwise grounded in reality.

Now, again, we are faced with the "from a distance" issue.  Again, I point out that it is a well established fact of our legal system that an attacker can, indeed, be a valid threat, under the Reasonable Man construct, even from a distance.  Exactly what that distance is is up to the Attorney General, Grand Jury, and/or Jury to decide.  While I agree that it is probably less than 50 feet, there is also significant precedent that it is also greater than nose-to-nose.  Ayoob and other authors have written extensively on the subject.  I recall him writing one piece about a female officer who failed to fire on a suspect who was more than 20 feet away from her because he was "so far away" and "only" armed with a knife.  It nearly cost her life.  He was obviously a justifiable threat but the officer had the same mind set as it appears you are suggesting.  I hope I'm wrong here.



> Interesting scenarios.  Have any of these ever resulted in a person defending themselves by throwing knives at an assailant?  I get your point (no pun intended), but it seems so far-fetched as to strain credulity.


Yes.  I saw some video the other day of a defender chucking a knife (and a lot of other stuff) at a person(s) attacking with knives.  Is it common?  Not that I'm aware of.

Let me be clear, again, I am not suggesting that this is a common occurrence nor that this is a "must have" skill in every person's arsenal who is interested in self defense.  I am merely saying that it is not solely the reserve of fantasy and that its use is legally justifiable in any case where the use of a firearm would also be legally justified.



> Just me personally - I would never, never, throw a weapon at a person.  The chances they would then use it on me are too frightening to even contemplate.


If my attacker has time to pick up a thrown weapon and "use it against" me then my tactics really need tweaking.  He should be too busy worrying about defending against my other self defense related attacks as I close range or wondering if he can catch me as I "shoot and scoot."



> The person who brought this up stated it as his normal method (years ago, as he said) of carry for self-defense weaponry.  That does indeed strike me as bizarre, fantasy, outlandish, odd, potentially illegal, and probably foolish.  I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but come on.  We get the occasional person on MT who talks about carrying around eggs full of ground up glass and pockets full of sand and so on. All are rightly pointed out to be fantasy nonsense in terms of practical, real-life, self-defense situations.  At a certain point, although I respect all martial arts traditions, I have to say woah up there pardner, that's just crazy talk.  If everything is OK, then nothing is NOT OK.  And carrying around a brace of throwing knives as self-defense?  Not OK.  Sorry, I have to say that.


I understand that it sounds far fetched, particularly in U.S. society where the role of distance weapon is better filled for most by firearms.  However, again, as a self defense tool (where legal), there is no legal difference in using one weapon instead of any other potential weapon.  If Deadly Force is justified then Deadly Force is justified and it doesn't matter what "force" was used to accomplish it.  Again, a thrown knife is justified in the same circumstances as a fired bullet.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 4, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I agree with that.  My belief is that if you can extricate yourself and run far enough away to create the distance necessary to throw knives at your assailant, you are most likely (unless the opponent is shooting at your or threatening to) no longer inside that 'reasonable man' test realm.
> [...]
> As long as it is justified, yes.  I just don't see that happening in many circumstances where one has the ability to run away, then turn and throw knives from a distance.


Again, there are many, many circumstances in which distance is involved, great enough where if a knife were used for self defense, it must be thrown, yet are still valid threats to life and limb.  Happens pretty regularly, actually.



> Although I can create such scenarios in my mind, I have to believe that in real life, it just doesn't happen.  Going about armed with a bandoleer of throwing knives as a primary self-defense weapon is just...wrong...to my way of thinking.


Do you read the NRA's "Armed Citizen" accounts?  Many of those have the attacker being shot from a distance.  From what records I can find, non-LEO shooting ranges are up to 15 or 20 feet.  While some are "contact" many are at greater than arms length.  Any of these self defense shootings that are greater than a few feet away would be no less justified if the defender used a thrown knife (for whatever reason).  While I still believe that would be unusual and more than noteworthy, it is neither illegal nor insane.  As for carrying multiple throwing knives, again, this sounds weirder than it actually is.  No one carries a single shot handgun for self defense.  If one were restricted to knives why wouldn't one want to be able to 'reload'?  I know it sounds weird, but try to look at it unemotionally.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 4, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> In any case, I have a little trouble imagining a modern-day self-defense news item that would involve both the assailant and the victim tossing knives at each other.


Because we have guns and we're smart enough to use them when they're available.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 4, 2012)

lklawson said:


> No one carries a single shot handgun for self defense.



Agree!

Many years ago in Taiwan when I were young, I had problem with some gang members. One gang member said that he would kill me next time we met. Since I didn't belong to any gang group, I had to protect myself. Since handgun was impossible to obtain in Taiwan. I always carried 3 throwing knifes with me. This way my chance would be better.

When your life was threaten, the legal problem would be the last thing that you considered. That life experience changed my view about MA. To me, learning MA is as simple as "not to be killed".


----------



## Aiki Lee (Oct 5, 2012)

I gotta go with lklawson on this one. Knife throwing or shuriken skills do have self defense capabilities. They are actually medium range skills used in the ways lklawson already said such as distraction to flee or as a set up for the next attack. I would throw a weapon I had at an attacker if I felt it would be more advantageous that keeping it in my hand. 
Oh and Bill, Isshin Ryu does have a kata where one throws a sai. Kusan ku sai was taught to me by my instructor that stated one should actually have 3 sai at the beginning. One to throw and the other two for the rest of the kata. Because its dangerous to throw weapons, it is practiced with usually only two sai with the third being an application explained through bunkai.


----------



## szorn (Dec 16, 2012)

MJS said:


> Bill started this thread in the GMA section.  A few of the posts caught my eye, with the mention of the badguy possibly taking away your weapon and using it against you.
> 
> So, I wanted to start this thread and discuss weapon retention.  Since many people carry a pocketknife or handgun, does anyone work on the retention of those tools?  IMO, I think that this is an important area.  I mean, if you're going to take the time to learn how to use the weapon, it'd be wise to also learn how to prevent it from being taken away from you.



Yes, retention of the tool is important if you plan to carry. As I am fond of pointing out, a weapon does no good if you can't access it or retain it under the stress of a real assault. That being said, many instructors make retention more complicated or complex than it needs to be. Others will teach weapon fixation, which means they get so caught up in holding on to the weapon that they fail to see openings or other options. 

That said, retention should be taught, before the weapon is drawn as well how to retain it once it's drawn. Retention may be as simple as striking a vital target on the attacker as he tries to disarm you. If the attacker is fixating on your weapon and trying to disarm you, take that opportunity to focus on attacking his vitals rather than fighting for dominance of the weapon. As long as his mind is engaged by the weapon you have a tactical advantage. The retention techniques that you train should be universal. This means they should be the same or very similar regardless of the weapon involved (knife, gun, baton, pepper spray, etc). If the techniques vary from weapon to weapon it can cause physical and mental log jam if you have to actually use the skills during an attack. Keep it simple and don't over-complicate it.

Steve


----------



## szorn (Dec 16, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I don't want to be seen as insulting any particular style.  I admit my first reaction to the notion of people carrying around throwing knives for the purpose of self-defense in today's society was to laugh.  I apologize for that.
> 
> However, I would like to point something out.  In terms of legal self-defense in the United States, I do not believe throwing knives have a place used as such.
> 
> ...



Well said!

The reality is that a knife is a lethal force tool designed for lethal force situations. That said, in order to justify the use of a knife in self-defense we must prove AOJ (Ability, Opportunity, and Jeopardy). if we can't prove AOJ then there is a real good chance we will face criminal charges and end up in jail. If you are far enough away from an attacker to be able to use throwing knives then you can't prove AOJ because the distance was too great for the attacker to be an immediate threat to your life UNLESS he was armed with a firearm, or a knife of his own. Even if the situation warranted lethal force what are the chances that you could hit a violently moving threat with a throwing knife? If you are able to hit the target it most likely will not be with the tip of the blade but with the spine or handle. Can this hurt a person? Sure, but it's not likely it will drastically slow or stop their forward momentum if they are intent on harming or killing you. Also, something else to consider...in many states and jurisdictions throwing knives are considered to be "martial arts weapons" and are illegal to carry.

If anyone believes they may be forced to use their skills in defense of themselves or someone else they should invest some time learning about self-defense laws, especially in their state and jurisdiction. Keep in mind that most cities / towns have their own laws that append the state laws. Learn them well or you may find yourself facing criminal charges for what you believed to be legitimate self-defense.

Steve


----------



## chinto (Dec 17, 2012)

weapons retention... as in a pistol?  I was taught to use a pistol long ago, and one of the biggest weapons retention things is simple.. if it is drawn shoot it! its not a magic wand!! it makes holes... if its serious enough to draw its serious enough to shoot!  no Talking and sure as hell no walking up and putting against some one!!!  

other then that if your very close get your off hand out there! get the pistol in tight and shoot it!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 17, 2012)

Just an aside as edged weapons were mentioned, bayonets haven't lost their use in war, still useful for a charge.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-19755107

(If anyone has ever watched 'Dad's army' the name of the soldier won't be lost on them.)


----------



## chinto (Dec 17, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Just an aside as edged weapons were mentioned, bayonets haven't lost their use in war, still useful for a charge.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-19755107
> 
> (If anyone has ever watched 'Dad's army' the name of the soldier won't be lost on them.)



if you have a rifle for home defense that has a bayonet stud, get the bayonet for it! it really is a viable and excellent weapon!! cold steel scares people!!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2012)

chinto said:


> if you have a rifle for home defense that has a bayonet stud, get the bayonet for it! it really is a viable and excellent weapon!! cold steel scares people!!




sorry I couldn't resist! In homage to actor Clive Dunn who played Cpl Jones in Dad's Army who died a few weeks ago. Memories of my childhood watching this.


----------



## Buka (Dec 18, 2012)

Weapon retention and throwing knives - or throwing any G Damn foolish thing should be two separate conversations. 

C'mon, really.


----------



## Uncle (Dec 18, 2012)

I've trained weapon retention for holstered weapons, firearm, and stick. I don't find I really need any specific weapon retention techniques for knife, just switching hands and rotating to cut any hand which grabs works for me. 

For stick I've done some recovery techniques. A big part of it besides the standard grip breaks, was just when they grab your stick their hand is occupied you can actually let go and strike them and recover the weapon as your striking hand retracts. It works pretty well since they usually will not have a good grip on the weapon when they grab or after you belt them in the face and snap the hand back jerking the weapon away. Not recommended by the surgeon general for firearms.


----------



## MJS (Dec 19, 2012)

chinto said:


> weapons retention... as in a pistol?  I was taught to use a pistol long ago, and one of the biggest weapons retention things is simple.. if it is drawn shoot it! its not a magic wand!! it makes holes... if its serious enough to draw its serious enough to shoot!  no Talking and sure as hell no walking up and putting against some one!!!
> 
> other then that if your very close get your off hand out there! get the pistol in tight and shoot it!



Weapon retention as in anything that you pick up to use as a weapon.


----------



## geezer (Dec 19, 2012)

Uncle said:


> For stick I've done some recovery techniques. A big part of it besides the standard grip breaks, was just when they grab your stick their hand is occupied you can actually let go and strike them and recover the weapon as your striking hand retracts. It works pretty well since they usually will not have a good grip on the weapon when they grab or after you belt them in the face and snap the hand back jerking the weapon away. Not recommended by the surgeon general for firearms.



Good post!

I've had good results with the same strategy. I remember sparring with a guy who practiced a well known eskrima system that favors many intricate and complex disarms and counters at close range. When he grabbed my stick, I would simply release and follow through with the strike using my bare hand leaving him literally "holding the stick" LOL. 

As you pointed out, it was usually pretty easy to re-take the stick on the retraction, especially if you scored a solid shot, and even better if you were giving him another shot with the other hand as you snatched back the stick you just "lent" him.


----------

