Is Knife defence even worth teaching?

[Chris Parker]

My own preferred knife defense sits behind my right hip. Except when I'm at work, since the hospital administration is far enough detached from reality to think that "No Weapons" signs on the doors will protect us.

To be honest here, Mark, no it's not. That's you preferred tactical response… which is very different to being a preferred defence. Your preferred defence might well be to disengage and gain distance in order to deploy your firearm… but this is like saying your favourite defence against road rage is to drive a tank. You may certainly dissuade others from driving aggressively around you, but it's not really a defence against getting caught up in such situations… as well as not being practical on a range of levels. And frankly, in the range that a knife assault typically occurs, I'd rather rely on some unarmed defence rather than try to go for a firearm… that's only really practicable when range is achieved… which requires you to have some actual defensive actions first.

 

[Tiger84]

Allright, this is kind of a continutation of "How do you defend against this? (knife attack)"

I'm continueing to hear how hopeless going up against anyone with a knife is, doesn't matter if it's a hooligan with a box cutter or a kali master with a fighting knife, you are pretty much out of luck no matter who you are. You might as well just give up.

What are your thoughts? Do you teach knife defence at your school? If so, what do you teach?

I'm very willing to learn and listen, so if you have any expierence/wisdom in this matter, please share.


Thanks.


Dan

Of course you should train knife defense... Knives are way more versitile than guns which makes them more dangerous. Just because you train knife defense doesn't mean your not going to get cut but it could save your life.

 

[Tiger84]

Wow, you guys really cleared things up. Thank you.

I've had a fair amount of professional (in a MA school not just watching YT) Knife vs Knife, and Hand vs Hand, but not much hand vs knife. In Kenpo we have a few techniqes for knife defence but I wouldn't stake my life on them.
I got a few ideas from Chris but do you guys have any preffered knife drills or techniques you teach in class?

We actually have many techniques that will work if the attacker had a knife instead of no weapon or a different weapon (wink wink). There's a handful that are specifically knife defense techniques but that doesn't mean others won't work effectively. Take a closer look at the material and do just that. Put a knife in their hand and see if you can run your techniques with it. There may be a modification or two that needs to happen but it's all there.

 

[lklawson]

Knives are way more versitile than guns which makes them more dangerous.

Which is why the military and police forces of every nation has eschewed firearms, preferring instead to remain exclusively with knives and swords.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[geezer]

Which is why the military and police forces of every nation has eschewed firearms, preferring instead to remain exclusively with knives and swords.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

He may have a point, Kirk.

Knives are versatile. I've used knives from everything from cutting cord, to eating food, to sharpening a pencil, to opening cans and getting inside a locked door (when a credit card wouldn't do the job). Knives are also dangerous. I cut my self, usually my fingers a zillion times using a knife (especially as a kid), and the last time I used one of our "good" kitchen knives as a screwdriver I almost got killed. ...by my wife. And, don't military forces issue knives? They should. Heck, I had one as a boy scout. Piece of crap but I really liked it.

Yep, knives are versatile and dangerous. Guns are not so versatile. But they can be very deadly.

Oh, and I'm ambivalent about training knife defenses. We do some basic stuff in our Escrima. And the highest percentage stuff I've seen is ...very low percentage. Learning that is probably the most important part of the training.

 

[drop bear]

He may have a point, Kirk.

Knives are versatile. I've used knives from everything from cutting cord, to eating food, to sharpening a pencil, to opening cans and getting inside a locked door (when a credit card wouldn't do the job). Knives are also dangerous. I cut my self, usually my fingers a zillion times using a knife (especially as a kid), and the last time I used one of our "good" kitchen knives as a screwdriver I almost got killed. ...by my wife. And, don't military forces issue knives? They should. Heck, I had one as a boy scout. Piece of crap but I really liked it.

Yep, knives are versatile and dangerous. Guns are not so versatile. But they can be very deadly.

Oh, and I'm ambivalent about training knife defenses. We do some basic stuff in our Escrima. And the highest percentage stuff I've seen is ...very low percentage. Learning that is probably the most important part of the training.

I would be interested to see if full contact changes the percentages on unarmed vs knife.

 

[Chris Parker]

No, it doesn't. Because it has little to no effect on what actually matters in the training there.

 

[drop bear]

No, it doesn't. Because it has little to no effect on what actually matters in the training there.

Have you actually tried it?

I mean the times i have taken knives off guys myself. Panelbeating them does seem to help

 

[Chris Parker]

I have done "full contact" training, I have done many, many years of knife defence, I understand how the training operates, what the important aspects are, and so on. I also understand the short-fall of a range of tactics that "work" in the dojo/training hall… and none of this is about "panelbeating" someone.

 

[drop bear]

I have done "full contact" training, I have done many, many years of knife defence, I understand how the training operates, what the important aspects are, and so on. I also understand the short-fall of a range of tactics that "work" in the dojo/training hall… and none of this is about "panelbeating" someone.

So you are suggesting that i will not get a greater chance of success if i really beat on a guy while defending a knife?

 

[Chris Parker]

Are you even following your own comments here? You asked about whether "full contact" would change the percentages… which is a training concept… and you're taking that to "full contact" in actual usage? Do you know anyone who suggests that we try some kinda non-contact response to a real knife threat? Really?

 

[drop bear]

Are you even following your own comments here? You asked about whether "full contact" would change the percentages… which is a training concept… and you're taking that to "full contact" in actual usage? Do you know anyone who suggests that we try some kinda non-contact response to a real knife threat? Really?

I have no idea what response you will try in a knife threat.

Mabye the better question is why if it has an effect in a real knife attack. Does it not have an effect in the training?

 

[Chris Parker]

Because in training, you're not fully applying such tactics and techniques…so there has to be some "play acting"… otherwise it just becomes unrealistic.

 

[Tgace]

I'd rather rely on some unarmed defence rather than try to go for a firearm… that's only really practicable when range is achieved… which requires you to have some actual defensive actions first.

Err...kinda...

There are several ways to deploy a handgun at CQB range or while engaged H2H.

Yes. You will need to resolve the immediate threat before drawing at close quarters, and "range" is one desired option, but "position" is acceptable if range can't be achieved.

of knives, guns and 21 feet.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[lklawson]

He may have a point, Kirk.

Knives are versatile. I've used knives from everything from cutting cord, to eating food, to sharpening a pencil, to opening cans and getting inside a locked door (when a credit card wouldn't do the job). Knives are also dangerous. I cut my self, usually my fingers a zillion times using a knife (especially as a kid), and the last time I used one of our "good" kitchen knives as a screwdriver I almost got killed. ...by my wife. And, don't military forces issue knives? They should. Heck, I had one as a boy scout. Piece of crap but I really liked it.

Yep, knives are versatile and dangerous. Guns are not so versatile. But they can be very deadly.

Nah. His claim is twofold. First that knives are "more versatile." More versatile for what? As a tool for cutting string and dividing peanut butter sandwiches? OK. As a tool for making holes in stuff at distance? No. "Versatile" is a very subjective term.

Second, he claims that this extra "versatility" makes knives "more dangerous." Hogwash. Guns are "more versatile" than a nuke, which has a very limited set of roles. Are guns, therefore, "more dangerous." Knives are good at cutting and stabbing (often differentiating between the two based on design) only at very close range. Guns are often good at poking holes in things at ranges from contact through to very long rage, bashing and bludgeoning, and cutting and stabbing.

Even if you choose to opt for a handgun without a bayonet (as some, particularly early examples) were oft configured, said handgun, wielded as a bludgeon, was like to permanently reconfigure a face and just flat out break stuff off of a person. There's a reason that "pistol whipping" is still considered deadly force.

Don't misunderstand, I'm a fan of knives (look at my avatar!) and I know about the Tueller drill (which Ohnimus knew in 1890). But I also understand reality. And the reality is as I have stated. Knives are only "more versatile" if you narrowly define versatility to your own ends and they're certainly not "more dangerous" or, as I already wrote, no one would be using guns, they'd all be using knives.

He doesn't have a point and he can click on "disagree" as many times as he likes. It won't change reality.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[geezer]

OK Kirk, I admit that I was joking around... mostly because I agree with you that the idea that knives are, overall, more deadly than guns is pretty silly. At very close range, the advantage of a gun is diminished but not eliminated.

I believe most people completely misunderstand the Tueller experiment and its findings, and somehow think that a knife is more deadly than a gun at that range. Hardly! Applied to self defense, the "21 ft. rule" has more to do with effective response time to a sudden unanticipated attack than the relative lethality of a knife versus gun. If the defender had a holstered knife or folder in a pocket, would he be better able to defend himself? Of course not. And what if your attacker coming at you from 21 feet away had a firearm ...would you be better off?

 

[meeshbenson]

Two of my friends and I got jumped last year by six high schoolers. Two of those high schoolers had knives and honestly we could have probably took them on if we had any knife self defense training. I was so mad because I have never felt so defenseless.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Two of my friends and I got jumped last year by six high schoolers. Two of those high schoolers had knives and honestly we could have probably took them on if we had any knife self defense training. I was so mad because I have never felt so defenseless.

Yeah, this is what I was referring to earlier when I said that some training might be worse than no training if it leads to a false sense of confidence that leads the student to try fighting when they shouldn't. Outnumbered 2 to 1 with two of the attackers having knives is not a situation where you want to fight unless you have absoulutely no choice.

 

[lklawson]

OK Kirk, I admit that I was joking around... mostly because I agree with you that the idea that knives are, overall, more deadly than guns is pretty silly. At very close range, the advantage of a gun is diminished but not eliminated.

Dangiit. You mean I just wasted a good rant?

I believe most people completely misunderstand the Tueller experiment and its findings, and somehow think that a knife is more deadly than a gun at that range. Hardly! Applied to self defense, the "21 ft. rule" has more to do with effective response time to a sudden unanticipated attack than the relative lethality of a knife versus gun. If the defender had a holstered knife or folder in a pocket, would he be better able to defend himself? Of course not. And what if your attacker coming at you from 21 feet away had a firearm ...would you be better off?

Well said. Several years back I taught a "test cutting" class in a western martial arts context. One of the drills I taught was a "deploy from carry and cut/stab" drill. It's amazing how freaking slow it can be, even to people who practice knife carry. Sure they were all deployed in less than a second, but the target was hanging right there in front of them at "contact" range. The presumption is that the knife is being deployed in response to an attack. I hope it was an eye opening drill for some of the participants.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Balrog]

Allright, this is kind of a continutation of "How do you defend against this? (knife attack)"

I'm continueing to hear how hopeless going up against anyone with a knife is, doesn't matter if it's a hooligan with a box cutter or a kali master with a fighting knife, you are pretty much out of luck no matter who you are. You might as well just give up.

If knife defense is taught correctly, it is invaluable. There are two fundamental rules:

1. You're most likely gonna get cut. Minimize the damage you take, maximize the damage you give.
2. If in doubt, see rule #1.

Remember that the attacker's focus is on the knife and his mindset is that he is superior because he is armed. Once you break his focus, you gain the advantage and you don't stop until he's on the ground and incapable of fighting with you any more. He's presented deadly force against you, so he's bought and paid for in my book. Anything you do is justified, up to and including lethal force in return.