- Joined
- Apr 27, 1999
- Messages
- 6,117
Reactions to guns and knives depends a lot on context. If you enter a friends house and find a gun or knife sitting on the table a gun is likeliest to raise anxiety. Upon finding the gun pro will think, "what idiot left this gun unattended?" while some women will regard the gun like a coiled rattler. (Of course most boy will say "cool" and reach to play with it). Knife reactions will be tamer. If some idiot is playing with the gun, even a pro may be somewhat alarmed, he probably would be simply amused if the guy is showing off with a knife.
In a situation of agression a gun is generally seen not just as a threat of harm, but also a tool of control. The police carry guns and they are seen as trying to control the public. In a sense a person with a gun is more likely to be seen as taking care of business. A person who behaves calmly with a gun is seen as a threat, but is also seen to have a certain authority. If they behave irrationally or very agressive the fear level will escalate, but it is most commonly a fear of sudden death. This is seen as painful, but not lingering, crippling, or disfiguring.
Calm or raving, an agressor with a knife is seen as threatening to maim, disfigure, or disembowel you. He is not seen as simply trying to establish control. He is seen as trying to create fear in his target, as an end in itself, or as intending to hack someone up to cause, pain, disfigurement and death. An agressor with a knife is likelier to be perceived as a sadist. Some of this attitude may actually be true, much of it comes from "slasher" movies.
A person defending himself with a gun is also perceived as trying to establish control. This makes it a little easier to back down an assailant, since you merely are having a slight disagreement about who is going to control a situation. On the other hand if you pull a knife on an assailant he will have a tendency to perceive that you are trying to scare him. Now it becomes a pride issue. If he has an audience he may feel abliged to show he can't be scared, while even alone he may get very angry if he feels you are trying to make him afraid. As an aggressor he may realize that he has a fair chance of at least hurting you before retiring from the scene, so you are likelier to have to use a knife than a gun. At times like this you wish that thugs had a better sense of self preservation.
It can be very advantageous if you pull a knife on an aggressor to persuade him you are crazy. This makes you harder to predict and likelier to attack him rather than to wait for his move. If you are crazy, you aren't trying to scare him, which takes much of his pride out of the picture. He also doesn't need to compete with you for control, since you aren't even under control of yourself.
Now, back in the courtroom, you have trouble if you actually have disemboweled your assailant. This is not perceived as a means of control like shooting him. It is perceived as maiming unto death. You are better off if you scared him away with your craziness or shot him. An exception might be made if you make a cut to a limb. A hand cut or even a stab to the thigh may be sold as a defense a lot easier than a cut or stab to the body, head, or neck. So act crazy, slash the guys leg, and run like hell.
In a situation of agression a gun is generally seen not just as a threat of harm, but also a tool of control. The police carry guns and they are seen as trying to control the public. In a sense a person with a gun is more likely to be seen as taking care of business. A person who behaves calmly with a gun is seen as a threat, but is also seen to have a certain authority. If they behave irrationally or very agressive the fear level will escalate, but it is most commonly a fear of sudden death. This is seen as painful, but not lingering, crippling, or disfiguring.
Calm or raving, an agressor with a knife is seen as threatening to maim, disfigure, or disembowel you. He is not seen as simply trying to establish control. He is seen as trying to create fear in his target, as an end in itself, or as intending to hack someone up to cause, pain, disfigurement and death. An agressor with a knife is likelier to be perceived as a sadist. Some of this attitude may actually be true, much of it comes from "slasher" movies.
A person defending himself with a gun is also perceived as trying to establish control. This makes it a little easier to back down an assailant, since you merely are having a slight disagreement about who is going to control a situation. On the other hand if you pull a knife on an assailant he will have a tendency to perceive that you are trying to scare him. Now it becomes a pride issue. If he has an audience he may feel abliged to show he can't be scared, while even alone he may get very angry if he feels you are trying to make him afraid. As an aggressor he may realize that he has a fair chance of at least hurting you before retiring from the scene, so you are likelier to have to use a knife than a gun. At times like this you wish that thugs had a better sense of self preservation.
It can be very advantageous if you pull a knife on an aggressor to persuade him you are crazy. This makes you harder to predict and likelier to attack him rather than to wait for his move. If you are crazy, you aren't trying to scare him, which takes much of his pride out of the picture. He also doesn't need to compete with you for control, since you aren't even under control of yourself.
Now, back in the courtroom, you have trouble if you actually have disemboweled your assailant. This is not perceived as a means of control like shooting him. It is perceived as maiming unto death. You are better off if you scared him away with your craziness or shot him. An exception might be made if you make a cut to a limb. A hand cut or even a stab to the thigh may be sold as a defense a lot easier than a cut or stab to the body, head, or neck. So act crazy, slash the guys leg, and run like hell.