For All You Tacktickle BadAsses Out There - Real %s for Gun and Knife Injuries

[SeaxyBeast]

I'd tend to disagree. I think the conclusions aren't really meaningful without more information on each of the wounds, at least the wounds of the survivors. I'm not as concerned about too much information, as the silly conclusions people might jump to, which are perfectly illustrated by the nature of the magazine we find the limited summary in. This is exactly how those stupid urban legends start.

The impression I get is that the knife survivors weren't wounded very severely. I'd be interested in the nature of the wounds that the survivors had. I suspect they weren't staked with a Becker 9 when the doctor got to them.

The journal article wasn't looking at any of the things that you are concerned with and didn't try to speak to any of the concerns you raise. It was looking at treatment of chest wounds for a medical journal and trying to see if the survival rates had improved. Don't blame the researcher if someone else misinterprets or misapplies the findings.

I'm more concerned about people getting their information from Cracked than I am about the article. CWL knew and said that Cracked should be taken with a grain of salt and they should, because while the numbers were well documented, the conclusions being drawn from the study were not the things the study was looking at in the first place. It's like going to the orchard looking for apples, finding an orange tree and picking a bunch and then saying "well, it's fruit."

[GotDogs]

Caliber and Gun Type, Blade length and width are all really pointless to the civilian unless bravado is your game.. Leaving an opening and knowing how to avoid a situation that requires deadly force is a mind set. Mental training if you will. Many civilians ( over carry ), Primary, back-up and a blade. The research time spent by most on the most lethal caliber etc. could / should use that time training. Can you draw your weapon of choice in a timely manner? Have you learned how to create space between you a bad guy. The guy that is going to rob or assault you has ZERO training and more than likely standing less than arms length from you so if you practice you are already one up on him. As a civilian the best defense is a good offense. I am not trying to stir any pots here. These are just my opinions and your results may vary.
Thinking PRACTICAL, Not Tacticool.
Cool thread topic CWL. Thanks, John

[killgar]

The guy that is going to rob or assault you has ZERO training

I've addressed this topic on this forum before, but I've got nothing better to do at the moment so, what the hell.

First, it is not at all unusual for civilians in this country to find themselves in violent encounters with current or former military personnel. Hate to say it, not trying to disparage the troops, I've got friends and family who are veterans, but it's true.

And while not all military personnel are highly trained in hand-to-hand, they do receive more training than the average citizen. And if they are vets, well, nothing teaches better than experience. A combat vet, even one with no h2h training, can still be a very formidable adversary.

And I always like to mention the NAVY SEAL who went on a rampage in the streets of Las Vegas recently, he ran around beating people with a steel pipe. Do an internet search for "Navy Seal Las Vegas" and read all about it, there's even video. Now one might say "Well, that's just one incident, it's so unlikely", but I doubt that is any comfort to all the people who had their skulls fractured, or their families. Now imagine if you were one of those victims, you're walking down the street with your woman and some guy runs up out of nowhere and starts beating on the two of you with a pipe. I imagine that you would fight back, perhaps you're to injured to run, perhaps your woman is wearing high-heels and can't run. So there you are, fighting hand-to-hand with a NAVY SEAL.

And lets not forget about all the criminals who have lived their entire lives in violence. Many are hard-core gang members who received their training on the violent streets of their neighborhoods. Many are violent ex-cons who received their training in prison, the hard way.

I always say that the most important weapon in ones defensive arsenal is the proper MINDSET. But to walk around underestimating the violent skills of those who might attack you is the exact opposite of the proper mindset. Always expect the worst from those who threaten you.

Not to nit-pick but, I don't believe that choice of gun caliber or blade style is necessarily a matter of bravado. Anyone who understands knife and gunshot wounds knows that some calibers are more effective against an attacker than others. A .357 magnum is certainly more effective at stopping an advancing attacker than a .22. A five inch blade has more chance of piercing the heart of an attacker than a 2 inch blade.

Just for the record, when I participate in this forum I do so with the general assumption that everyone is smart enough to know that the best survival tactic when faced with a threat is to RUN AWAY. Of course, running isn't always an option, no matter what we do or how hard we train.

I'm not looking to be critical or argue, I'm just killing time here at the end of my lunch break.

[ec9]

….reload…. I kid, I kid.

Lots of individuals die from gunshot wounds here including 3 leos last year. It’s best to mitigate if you can. More than likely if some one is going to rob or mug you they have already surpassed the point where they care about killing you. The only reason they don’t is to pass on a murder charge. There’s a lot of good post in this thread that make a lot of sense. The best weapon is the one you have is attached to your shoulders, use that one first and you are already ahead of the game.

[shunsui]

The journal article wasn't looking at any of the things that you are concerned with and didn't try to speak to any of the concerns you raise. It was looking at treatment of chest wounds for a medical journal and trying to see if the survival rates had improved. Don't blame the researcher if someone else misinterprets or misapplies the findings.

I'm more concerned about people getting their information from Cracked than I am about the article. CWL knew and said that Cracked should be taken with a grain of salt and they should, because while the numbers were well documented, the conclusions being drawn from the study were not the things the study was looking at in the first place. It's like going to the orchard looking for apples, finding an orange tree and picking a bunch and then saying "well, it's fruit."

Hard to argue with that. Totally agree.