What weapons are Taekwondo?

[Flying Crane]

I'm sure there are too, I never denied that fact - simply though, in most cases it should be avoided.

That said, I'm equally sure that sometimes, grabbing the blade is actually the best option available.

It can be the only option available, and all it does is buy you an additional 15 seconds before you die anyways.

 

[Flying Crane]

There was a case just recently of a woman who got angry at her boyfriend for cheating on her, and instead of breaking up with him like a sensible person, she bought a sword at the mall and hid it under the bed, and attacked him with it when he fell asleep. He said that he used martial arts skills he learned from watching kung fu movies to defend himself , but he still ended up in the hospital. IIRC, the article said that they had to reattach a couple of of his fingers and put a titanium plate on one of his bones.

Ah well, there are always exceptions.

And of course a sneak attack while you are sleeping, that’s a whole other realm.

 

[pdg]

It can be the only option available, and all it does is buy you an additional 15 seconds before you die anyways.

Yeah, alright.

But I grab your sword, deflect the stabbing motion and with my other hand perform a perfect spearhand thrust under your ribcage so I can pull out your heart and show it to you...

Y'know, academically speaking

 

[CB Jones]

A rifle is relatively easy to aim reasonably well at something like 40 yards, but an unskilled person with a rifle? Not all that likely to hit a moving target (serpentine )

Run at them, weave a bit, you'll probably get to kick them in the face.

An unskilled person with a handgun? I'd rather go up against them than an unskilled person with a sword...

Not good ideas.

 

[skribs]

Sure, but if some is coming at you with homicidal intent, swinging and stabbing at you with 3 feet of sharp steel, faster than your eye can follow, do you really believe you are going to be mindful of the sharp bits as panic sets in and you try to block and desperately grab at the weapon before you die? Keep in mind, you are unarmed in this scenario.

Seriously, come on man.

Avoid the blade, go for the hands and the arm. I'm not saying it's going to be easy. I'm saying identification of what is the dangerous part of the weapon is easy.

 

[pdg]

Not good ideas.

Ok then, suggest some better ideas.

Roll over and cry until they come over and shoot you?

 

[CB Jones]

Ok then, suggest some better ideas.

Roll over and cry until they come over and shoot you?

Use cover and/or concealment?

Run away not toward?

And an unskilled person with a handgun is way more dangerous than and unskilled person with a sword. Range of sword....5 feet? Range of 9 mm....over 100 yards? Never bring a sword to a gunfight.

 

[pdg]

Use cover and/or concealment?

Run away not toward?

And an unskilled person with a handgun is way more dangerous than and unskilled person with a sword. Range of sword....5 feet? Range of 9 mm....over 100 yards? Never bring a sword to a gunfight.

I thought the 'run away' or 'duck and cover' options had been taken away already.

And yeah, sure, a 9mm has more range than a sword - but you should really know about accuracy in unskilled hands. The chances of them hitting you stood still are slim, add sone movement...

Even if they hit you, there's a damn good chance it might not even slow you down much, much less take you down.

 

[skribs]

I thought the 'run away' or 'duck and cover' options had been taken away already.

And yeah, sure, a 9mm has more range than a sword - but you should really know about accuracy in unskilled hands. The chances of them hitting you stood still are slim, add sone movement...

Even if they hit you, there's a damn good chance it might not even slow you down much, much less take you down.

This is the reason I am very much against magazine restrictions on firearms. When you combine the accuracy your average person will have in a self defense situation, the amount of hits that might be needed to take someone down, and factor in the possibility of 2, 3, or more attackers...the number of rounds you may need can get pretty high pretty quick.

 

[CB Jones]

but you should really know about accuracy in unskilled hands. The chances of them hitting you stood still are slim, add sone movement...

I wish this was the case. Fact is your odds aren't that good.

Even if they hit you, there's a damn good chance it might not even slow you down much, much less take you down.

Whether you die instantly or bleed out 15 minutes later....dead is still....dead

 

[skribs]

I wish this was the case. Fact is your odds aren't that good.



Whether you die instantly or bleed out 15 minutes later....dead is still....dead

The majority of people shot with guns don't die from their wounds. All gunshots are potentially lethal, but being hit by a bullet doesn't mean you're guaranteed dead.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yeah, alright.

But I grab your sword, deflect the stabbing motion and with my other hand perform a perfect spearhand thrust under your ribcage so I can pull out your heart and show it to you...

Y'know, academically speaking

Show it to me before I die?

 

[Flying Crane]

Avoid the blade, go for the hands and the arm. I'm not saying it's going to be easy. I'm saying identification of what is the dangerous part of the weapon is easy.

Sure identification is not so difficult for the obvious bits (there are some less obvious bit too...)

But ok, as long as we don’t pretend this is gonna be easy...

 

[Flying Crane]

I thought the 'run away' or 'duck and cover' options had been taken away already.

Yeah, that was part of the academic side of the discussion: a person armed with a weapon vs. an unarmed person who has only his empty-hand skills, no other factors to otherwise tip the scale. What kind of chance does that unarmed person really have?

And yeah, sure, a 9mm has more range than a sword - but you should really know about accuracy in unskilled hands. The chances of them hitting you stood still are slim, add sone movement...

Even if they hit you, there's a damn good chance it might not even slow you down much, much less take you down.

Unskilled with a gun is far more dangerous than unskilled with a sword. Especially if you are factoring in a high-capacity magazine in a 9mm. What is that, something like 12-17 rounds?

If someone is intent on killing you, with that scenario you are dead dead dead.

 

[pdg]

Show it to me before I die?

Exactly, so you can see how black it is - serves you right for attacking me with a sword

 

[pdg]

I wish this was the case. Fact is your odds aren't that good.

Not good vs none (i.e. staying still) - I'll take those odds.

Whether you die instantly or bleed out 15 minutes later....dead is still....dead

They've got to hit me first - we're talking an unskilled person, remember?

Years back I did a 'thing' with the army where we got to shoot on the ranges. Handguns were done indoors, on a 30 yard range.

Of about 30 people (excluding me, I've shot a bit) not one managed more than one shot (out of 12) inside a 12" static target, with time to position, aim, breathe, aim again, and so on.

Given where I live, that sort of performance is what I'd consider reasonably average...

If I have no chance staying still, I'll grab those slim odds with both hands - worth a go...

 

[skribs]

Unskilled with a gun is far more dangerous than unskilled with a sword. Especially if you are factoring in a high-capacity magazine in a 9mm. What is that, something like 12-17 rounds?

If the weapon was designed around 12-17 rounds, that's "standard capacity", not "high capacity".

Against a single opponent, 12-17 rounds should be enough for someone with basic firearms competency and no experience to put you down. However, this is statistically speaking.

• I've seen videos where a cop and a criminal are literally about 6 feet away from each other, dump their magazines at each other, and then get back in their cars and continue a high speed chase.
• I've read stories about a mother who emptied a 6-shooter in (I believe it was .38 special) at a home invader, hit him 5 times - all in the face - and he ran away.

So while statistically 12 rounds should be more than enough to stop a single person, it's not outside the realm of probability for the shooter to get 0 hits in.

 

[Flying Crane]

If the weapon was designed around 12-17 rounds, that's "standard capacity", not "high capacity".

Against a single opponent, 12-17 rounds should be enough for someone with basic firearms competency and no experience to put you down. However, this is statistically speaking.

• I've seen videos where a cop and a criminal are literally about 6 feet away from each other, dump their magazines at each other, and then get back in their cars and continue a high speed chase.
• I've read stories about a mother who emptied a 6-shooter in (I believe it was .38 special) at a home invader, hit him 5 times - all in the face - and he ran away.

So while statistically 12 rounds should be more than enough to stop a single person, it's not outside the realm of probability for the shooter to get 0 hits in.

Yup.

 

[TrueJim]

Ok then, suggest some better ideas

 

[TrueJim]

The majority of people shot with guns don't die from their wounds.

What do they die from?