Planning for a Knife attack

[JowGaWolf]

Depends on the leather. Depends on the knife.
Most leather jackets that I see are really not that thick, and wouldn't be much protection against most knives.

Leather jackets aren't made with knife stabs and knife slashes in mind. It's safer to assume that all leather jackets will fail to prevent a knife stable or slash.

 

[Juany118]

Leather jackets aren't made with knife stabs and knife slashes in mind. It's safer to assume that all leather jackets will fail to prevent a knife stable or slash.

Yep. My wife is a dedicated Motorcyclist and has some hardcore decent leather jackets for that purpose. I also have a friend that is into historic Medieval reenactment and swordsmanship. He has some leather armor that is made to the specs of the period. The two are VERY different. I would trust a biker jacket to stop the slash of my Gerber folder (but be damaged), it may slow, but not enough to matter, a thrust from its tanto point. If I was using an actual combat knife, K-Bar, Bowie, Kukri, forget about it, the leather Jacket would lose.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

True but one also has to remember something else on your first point. You can have a knife ready to use and it can't be seen, especially in low light conditions, far more often than a gun. This is especially true if the subject has the knife held in a reverse grip or if it is a fast deploying folder like a Spiderco or one of the plethora of "assisted" knives like the Gerber I routinely carry.

That is one of the reasons why, unlike on TV, a well trained officer will NOT say "show me your hands" they will instead say, "don't move" because the act of "showing" the hands and preparing an attack can be very similar. Same applies to subjects you suspect may have a firearm on their person (their back is to you, hand at waist band etcetera.)

That is no longer knife-v-gun territory, because the defender (in this case, the guy with the gun) isn't defending against a knife - he never sees it. In that case, you're maybe better off with empty hands than a gun.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Leather jackets aren't made with knife stabs and knife slashes in mind. It's safer to assume that all leather jackets will fail to prevent a knife stable or slash.

Of course they aren't. They're clothing, not body armor.
Now, if I have the opportunity to wrap the leather around my arm (perhaps I'm carrying, not wearing, the jacket) then it becomes possible to deflect a blade with it with reasonable success. At least for a limited number of cuts. In my case, it only has to hold up long enough for me to shoot the bad guy...

 

[Juany118]

That is no longer knife-v-gun territory, because the defender (in this case, the guy with the gun) isn't defending against a knife - he never sees it. In that case, you're maybe better off with empty hands than a gun.

Oh you are right. I was simply trying to point out the ultimate danger of a knife, it has a greater element of surprise. On the job I am actually more concerned about knives than guns. They can penetrate my vest, are more quickly deployed and can even be ready when you are unprepared. One of the reasons I chose a school that teaches both Inosanto Kali and WC wasn't just the Sifu's attitude towards teaching but I have always felt knowing how to use a weapon allows you to better defend against said weapon.

For people not regularly training in knife defense, if they can carry a pistol, I usually suggest that they learn tactics and/or maneuvers that permit them to disengage rapidly, gain distance and get to that gun. Even if you know knife disarms, if you are facing a skilled knife fighter, you are likely not getting away unscathed if you just go for a disarm control. It's actually safer, imo, to train as I note above, get that distance and then turn a knife fight into a gun fight. If you don't have a gun get that distance and pick up your own weapon, even if improvised, from your environment, and go for that hand. Hit someone solid on a hand with a pool cue, bottle of booze, tray like you get at a food court in the mall etc and they are likely dropping it. Open hand vs knife should be a last resort.

 

[Juany118]

As an aside, I think this topic isn't covered enough in self defense circles. The US, over all, has never really been a knife culture. Fist fights, wrestling, brawls, guns, these are the most common forms of violence you encountered of the streets. However, even if they have no formal Art there are certain cultures in Latin America that are knife cultures, your "fist fight" being a knife fight. So along with immigration add in the growing popularity of FMA, fueled in part by Hollywood with the Bourne Franchise, Taken, Jack Reacher, etc. (Heck I have seen FMA slapped onto the glass of existing strip mall Martial Arts Schools). While the chances of you being involved in a violent encounter are low, due to the above factors I believe it logical to assume we will see an increase in violent acts involving knives sometime in the future and so the old saying "forewarned is forearmed" comes to mind.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

As an aside, I think this topic isn't covered enough in self defense circles. The US, over all, has never really been a knife culture. Fist fights, wrestling, brawls, guns, these are the most common forms of violence you encountered of the streets. However, even if they have no formal Art there are certain cultures in Latin America that are knife cultures, your "fist fight" being a knife fight. So along with immigration add in the growing popularity of FMA, fueled in part by Hollywood with the Bourne Franchise, Taken, Jack Reacher, etc. (Heck I have seen FMA slapped onto the glass of existing strip mall Martial Arts Schools). While the chances of you being involved in a violent encounter are low, due to the above factors I believe it logical to assume we will see an increase in violent acts involving knives sometime in the future and so the old saying "forewarned is forearmed" comes to mind.

I made this thread a while back. You may find the video and comments interesting
The danger of knives

 

[Juany118]

I made this thread a while back. You may find the video and comments interesting
The danger of knives

Yeah I use video when people try to tell me the "reactionary gap" is a myth. There is actually a video MythBusters did. Their gap was something like 18 feet vs 21 but the person doing the running with the knife was Jamie Hyneman and neither of those guys are what I would call athletic lol

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Oh you are right. I was simply trying to point out the ultimate danger of a knife, it has a greater element of surprise. On the job I am actually more concerned about knives than guns. They can penetrate my vest, are more quickly deployed and can even be ready when you are unprepared. One of the reasons I chose a school that teaches both Inosanto Kali and WC wasn't just the Sifu's attitude towards teaching but I have always felt knowing how to use a weapon allows you to better defend against said weapon.

For people not regularly training in knife defense, if they can carry a pistol, I usually suggest that they learn tactics and/or maneuvers that permit them to disengage rapidly, gain distance and get to that gun. Even if you know knife disarms, if you are facing a skilled knife fighter, you are likely not getting away unscathed if you just go for a disarm control. It's actually safer, imo, to train as I note above, get that distance and then turn a knife fight into a gun fight. If you don't have a gun get that distance and pick up your own weapon, even if improvised, from your environment, and go for that hand. Hit someone solid on a hand with a pool cue, bottle of booze, tray like you get at a food court in the mall etc and they are likely dropping it. Open hand vs knife should be a last resort.

Agreed. Any weapon you're competent with gives two advantages: more focused strike (usually harder surface) and potentially something besides skin to absorb slashes (especially that tray you mentioned). Some also give you some extension, so you can stay away from the blade. Most people I've met who carry a gun would be better off not trying to use it in that situation, though. They've not trained their draw nearly enough, partly because most ranges don't allow it. They would likely not get clear of the holster before the attacker closed distance again. Heck, one holster I used was a little too good at retention; someone using it for daily carry would be at risk of not getting out of the holster at all with panic-numbed, sweaty hands.

All of that presupposes awareness of the knife. As you said, it's an easy weapon to deploy and hard to see under non-optimal circumstances. I train students in knife disarms simply because they're unlikely to be aware of the knife before they engage it, so they need to know what to do if they get ahold of an arm that has a pointy end. And I agree about training to use as a path to training to defend. If nothing else, training with trained users yields better attacks to work against. I've been working on material to add to my curriculum for that reason, leveraging what I've picked up over the years. (Note to self: it's about time to go brush up on knife work somewhere.)

 

[Juany118]

Agreed. Any weapon you're competent with gives two advantages: more focused strike (usually harder surface) and potentially something besides skin to absorb slashes (especially that tray you mentioned). Some also give you some extension, so you can stay away from the blade. Most people I've met who carry a gun would be better off not trying to use it in that situation, though. They've not trained their draw nearly enough, partly because most ranges don't allow it. They would likely not get clear of the holster before the attacker closed distance again. Heck, one holster I used was a little too good at retention; someone using it for daily carry would be at risk of not getting out of the holster at all with panic-numbed, sweaty hands.

All of that presupposes awareness of the knife. As you said, it's an easy weapon to deploy and hard to see under non-optimal circumstances. I train students in knife disarms simply because they're unlikely to be aware of the knife before they engage it, so they need to know what to do if they get ahold of an arm that has a pointy end. And I agree about training to use as a path to training to defend. If nothing else, training with trained users yields better attacks to work against. I've been working on material to add to my curriculum for that reason, leveraging what I've picked up over the years. (Note to self: it's about time to go brush up on knife work somewhere.)

Agreed on the training/firearm issue. I usually ask people who carry for personal protection "do you practice stress shooting, reactive shooting and how to draw and shoot, safely, if your opponent is in melee range?" If the answer is "no" then I say, "please don't bother carrying it then because all you can do is basically shoot a bad guy from ambush and if you are actually defending yourself you will get crushed and a bad guy now has your gun."

 

[lklawson]

As an aside, I think this topic isn't covered enough in self defense circles. The US, over all, has never really been a knife culture.

Well, actually, yes, it was. But it's generations gone now.

Many of the cultures which came to the U.S. were "knife cultures." The Spanish with the navaja and, later, the Italians with the stiletto were examples but there are many more.

Most notably, however, the Bowie Knife "craze" which lasted for decades, bookending the U.S. Civil War, definitely was a "knife culture." Bowie Knives were kit for soldiers. Bowie knives and "longknives" (such as the Arkansas Toothpick) were kit for trappers and longhunters. Bowie Knives were fashion accessories for politicians and gentlemen. Bowie Knife duels were fought in the Arkansas state house and in New Orleans beneath what is now referred to as "The Dueling Oaks." Heck, Lincoln's bodyguard was known to carry a Bowie Knife. The U.S. totally had a "knife culture."

But over-hyped newspaper accounts of the time then, as now ("if it bleeds it leads"), lead to a public push, and political "do something" movement, which outlawed the carrying and use of Bowie Knives. You can still see it in many state laws which specifically name out Bowie Knives as prohibited carry items. Further, Britain at the time was (and in many ways still is) very "anti-knife" and, as the closest cultural cousin, had an impact on U.S. culture. This lead to eventually reducing the concept of knife-fighting in the U.S. Besides, most people generally felt that guns were more efficient, an attitude which I can document as being directly applied to knife-fighting and knife-culture going back to the early 20th Century (as well as a specific note of what we now call "The Tueller Drill" or the "21 foot rule.") I can present a ref. on that later if you would like to read it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Juany118]

Well, actually, yes, it was. But it's generations gone now.

Many of the cultures which came to the U.S. were "knife cultures." The Spanish with the navaja and, later, the Italians with the stiletto were examples but there are many more.

Most notably, however, the Bowie Knife "craze" which lasted for decades, bookending the U.S. Civil War, definitely was a "knife culture." Bowie Knives were kit for soldiers. Bowie knives and "longknives" (such as the Arkansas Toothpick) were kit for trappers and longhunters. Bowie Knives were fashion accessories for politicians and gentlemen. Bowie Knife duels were fought in the Arkansas state house and in New Orleans beneath what is now referred to as "The Dueling Oaks." Heck, Lincoln's bodyguard was known to carry a Bowie Knife. The U.S. totally had a "knife culture."

But over-hyped newspaper accounts of the time then, as now ("if it bleeds it leads"), lead to a public push, and political "do something" movement, which outlawed the carrying and use of Bowie Knives. You can still see it in many state laws which specifically name out Bowie Knives as prohibited carry items. Further, Britain at the time was (and in many ways still is) very "anti-knife" and, as the closest cultural cousin, had an impact on U.S. culture. This lead to eventually reducing the concept of knife-fighting in the U.S. Besides, most people generally felt that guns were more efficient, an attitude which I can document as being directly applied to knife-fighting and knife-culture going back to the early 20th Century (as well as a specific note of what we now call "The Tueller Drill" or the "21 foot rule.") I can present a ref. on that later if you would like to read it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I will clarify and say "modern USA". It may be apocryphal but I remember once hearing a story that back in the 1800's the Congress banned Reps carrying Bowie knives because enough brawls and beatings occurred with walking sticks lol.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Agreed on the training/firearm issue. I usually ask people who carry for personal protection "do you practice stress shooting, reactive shooting and how to draw and shoot, safely, if your opponent is in melee range?" If the answer is "no" then I say, "please don't bother carrying it then because all you can do is basically shoot a bad guy from ambush and if you are actually defending yourself you will get crushed and a bad guy now has your gun."

Agreed!

I have a college friend who still talks about the time I walked up to him at a range, took his gun from his hand, and showed him how accurate it can be. He tells it like it was amazing, and I consider myself a mediocre shooter. In any competition, I'd get crushed. I'm basically defensively capable, and still come across as a great expert to the average shooter. That's a problem. I should be the average, not the exception.

 

[drop bear]

Getting the situation under control before the knife is out and able to do damage is half the battle.

Getting the guy as the hand goes into the pocket raised your success rate.

 

[Buka]

Statistically - other than firearms, which will never be surpassed, knife is the second most oft used killing tool in the United States.

 

[WW3 Combatives]

It's always great to carry some form of weapon with you. Anything can be used as an equalizer. Even if you don't have a weapon on you, there is usually something around that can be used. Like what was said above, when someone knows what they are doing with an knife you are usually bleeding before you notice it. Knives are used for killing and intimidation. When they are being used to kill you feel it before you see it. When it is being used for intimidation such as during a robbery or rape it will be shown to you. If you hope to get your weapon out you will have to make space while you are pulling it out.

In most cases you don't have time. You either have to already have it in your hand or run away and pull it out in case they catch up to you. When you can't run away, you have to attack the man. Disarms are dangerous and will get you killed. Your attacks would have to be vicious and with the intent to kill. This is a life or death situation and must be taken seriously. There is no way that curling up into a ball and praying to your god will save you. You will just get cut and stabbed way more times then if you fought back. It is your responsibility to get yourself out of that situation.

So the best weapons to carry would be awareness, knowledge and skill. They are light weight and very useful haha.

 

[WW3 Combatives]

Yes. All of this. The knife-beats-gun argument is based upon the knife user having his weapon out, and the gun being holstered (it was research for LEO's facing armed suspects). You could swap the two weapons (gun out, knife sheathed) and the numbers swing drastically in the other direction...then they keep going, because the gun-wielder need not get within range of the knife.

I favor a cane, because even the TSA can't take it away from me. I do need one from time to time (crappy knees, highly arthritic toe), and develop an amazing limp when I get near airport security checkpoints. Odd, that.

A cane is a great weapon. When someone gets a cane it should come with a free lesson one how to use it as a weapon. The person using it already has a handicap which makes them vulnerable to attack.

 

[Juany118]

It's always great to carry some form of weapon with you. Anything can be used as an equalizer. Even if you don't have a weapon on you, there is usually something around that can be used. Like what was said above, when someone knows what they are doing with an knife you are usually bleeding before you notice it. Knives are used for killing and intimidation. When they are being used to kill you feel it before you see it. When it is being used for intimidation such as during a robbery or rape it will be shown to you. If you hope to get your weapon out you will have to make space while you are pulling it out.

In most cases you don't have time. You either have to already have it in your hand or run away and pull it out in case they catch up to you. When you can't run away, you have to attack the man. Disarms are dangerous and will get you killed. Your attacks would have to be vicious and with the intent to kill. This is a life or death situation and must be taken seriously. There is no way that curling up into a ball and praying to your god will save you. You will just get cut and stabbed way more times then if you fought back. It is your responsibility to get yourself out of that situation.

So the best weapons to carry would be awareness, knowledge and skill. They are light weight and very useful haha.

I agree with almost everything you say with a couple exceptions. Note the following is anecdotal experience gain over 18+ years as a LEO.

The idea of "felt vs seen" with a knife is true, for either a trained knife fighter or an experienced person, say from prison life, already planning to simply attack. People committing robberies, posturing as proceeds a bar or street fight usually has the person displaying the weapon.

Second disarms. It all depends on your training. Now I have yet to disarm someone with a knife but I have disarmed people with a crow bar, club etc using the same techniques Aikido and FMA teach for disarms because my option was to "take a hit" as I went for a tool or disarm. Now that should indeed be a last resort, even if you are well trained, because you can still get cut but, luckily, most people you run into on the street will not be trained or experienced in knife fighting. Also what I note above comes down to you being better trained than the person facing you.

 

[WW3 Combatives]

I agree with almost everything you say with a couple exceptions. Note the following is anecdotal experience gain over 18+ years as a LEO.

The idea of "felt vs seen" with a knife is true, for either a trained knife fighter or an experienced person, say from prison life, already planning to simply attack. People committing robberies, posturing as proceeds a bar or street fight usually has the person displaying the weapon.

Second disarms. It all depends on your training. Now I have yet to disarm someone with a knife but I have disarmed people with a crow bar, club etc using the same techniques Aikido and FMA teach for disarms because my option was to "take a hit" as I went for a tool or disarm. Now that should indeed be a last resort, even if you are well trained, because you can still get cut but, luckily, most people you run into on the street will not be trained or experienced in knife fighting. Also what I note above comes down to you being better trained than the person facing you.

Disarms are most definitely possible but still very dangerous. I knife compared to a club or a crowbar are a little different even though the same techniques can work. The knife has a point and sharp edge. If it isn't disarmed immediately or the first time, you have now put yourself within range and have a greater chance of being stabbed and cut. Such a difficult situation to deal with. As far as my training is concerned. You have to go in 100% or get out 100%, there is no in between.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Disarms are most definitely possible but still very dangerous. I knife compared to a club or a crowbar are a little different even though the same techniques can work. The knife has a point and sharp edge. If it isn't disarmed immediately or the first time, you have now put yourself within range and have a greater chance of being stabbed and cut. Such a difficult situation to deal with. As far as my training is concerned. You have to go in 100% or get out 100%, there is no in between.

Disarms should be the end point of another technique, IMO. In that case they are not more dangerous than anything else - they are simply what's available at that decision point. If I compare trying to take the knife away vs. punching someone, the punch is probably safer. If I compare the punch to a punch and an off-balancing movement, the punch is more dangerous. Now, if I put the disarm at the end of the off-balancing movement (because it becomes available at that point, for instance) then it is safer than the punch.

What's dangerous is leaving the weapon in their hand (and them capable of using it) or trying to force any specific response.