"Daggers, Daggers, Daggers"

X

xxxx

Joined
Oct 16, 1999
Messages
40
Hello group,

If you were going to war and you were allowed to have two (2) daggers; one (1) being a "boot dagger" and one (1) being a "full sized dagger", which would you pick to take with you.

Thank you in advance for your responses.

Best regards,

xxxx
 
Bleep the daggers, I'll take a M-14, thank you. A war is a gunfight, and you know what they say about bringing a knife to a gunfight...Besides you'd want a knife/tool like a Wicked knives 101st, or a Battle mistress (Dare I say recon scout?) etc.
Not to be harsh, but daggers are just sooo limited in use. Peace!

------------------
Can it core a apple?
 
Going to war in modern times with a rifle and a radio to call in an air strike? As a uniformed soldier (younger and stronger thinner and more agile than I am in real life, of course), and not a deep cover spy plotting to get real close to a high-ranking bad guy on an important suicide mission (maybe "fat geezer" be a good cover)? Daggers as in double edge sticking knives that aren't the most useful pattern for field cutting chores?

I'd probably take the two daggers I thought would make the best barter goods, preferably two that didn't weight much - unless I could substitute them, under this hypothetical regulation, at the beginning for a couple of good working knives that could also do willful damage if everything went wrong!

In production knives, maybe a Fallkniven A1, a Spyderco Military, and also sneak a Leatherman Tool in there somewhere.



------------------
- JKM
www.chaicutlery.com
AKTI Member # SA00001
 
Someone define dagger for me and maybe provide an example. I apaprently have been misinformed what one is...
 
When I went in the field as a Marine I found the little USMC folder served all of my tool needs.
Today I would prefer a Leatherman.

However, I would also like to carry a desperation knife, and the dagger fits that role perfectly.
The FS dagger or the Randall #2 would work for me, but I would really prefer the 13.5" short sword which Gene Osborn has in his shop awaiting heat treatment this very moment.
Think of a pit bull Randall #2.

Ironically, James Mattis has a beautiful short sword on his site that would make a perfect battle dagger.
I write this from work, so I don't have the URL bookmarked here, and I don't have the energy to go find it, but James' site has so much to offer you would profit more by going there, wandering around and finding it yourself.

My dad said that in the Pacific war, they used their folders for tools and saved their KABAR's for that last ditch effort, and that on a few occasions it did in fact come down to knives, teeth, rocks and fingernails.

I have heard similar reports from Vietnam era Marines: knives, teeth, rocks and fingernails.

So I don't see a battle dagger as out of place on any battlefield, air strikes notwithstanding.


------------------
Luke 22:36, John 18:6-11, Freedom

 
As some one else mentioned Daggers are severely limited in their application. Sentry Removal is the only area in which they really shine. As far as production daggers are concerned I would pack a Boker AF, CS Peacekeeper, or Gerber MkII, these would remain strictly Sentry Remover/Fighters. I wouldn't leave home w/ out a Folder dummied in a pocket somewhere and at least a 6 to 7 inch Fighter/Utility type pattern. If terrain dictated a larger chopper like a Kukri, Battle mistress, or RTAK would be Ideal.
 
I not a big fan of daggers and feel that a combat knife is primarily a utility tool not a weapon. however, if I were forced to carry one it would probably be a T-handled model such as the Coldsteel Peacekeeper (small, light, and compact)
 
not the strick definition of a dagger, but a Jim Siska design with some specific merit:
1706.jpeg
thanks to http://www.arizonacustomknives.com
Aaron

------------------
amacks@nist.gov
Don't forget to pay your taxes...they eventually become my knives:)

 
I hear people talk about the limitations of a dagger, and they may know more about it than I do.
However, I think we have put the dagger in a "mind box", and put limitations on it and failed to notice its other qualities of quickness and general handiness.
In the short sword, battle dagger, fighting knife I designed and which Gene Osborn has in his shop now, I tried to acheive a more versatile balance without compromising the dagger's thrusting power.
I had in mind some of the qualities of the Smatchet and the Keltic Leaf Sword.
These dagger shapes lend themselves to thrusting, slashing and the draw cut.
They don't "hack" like a Bowie, but then a Bowie won't draw cut backhand quite as well as a dagger, either.

Let's take the extreme of the FS dagger.
It won't slash particularly well and it doesn't "hack" at all, but its lightning quick draw cut and thrust make it deadly in close quarters.
I really do see certain knives as legitimate weapons, albeit desperation, self-defense or assassination weapons, and not as field tools at all.
I thought the dagger specification of this topic implied weapon and not field tool.

You know, many municipalities and state governments prohibit the two edged knife for the very reason of its deadliness, and the difficulty of defending against it in grappling range.
I think they pass these laws to protect cops more than citizens from each other.

Incidentally, the mention of the Shrike above stirred my admiration of that design.
I know that Mad Dog states sentry removal as its designed purpose, but I consider the Shrike and the Mini-Shrike as premier self-defense blades.
That comes from my philosophy of the knife as a surprise weapon.

Anyway, I actually had some sentry removal training in the Marines, and none of it involved a knife.
They did discuss the knife, and specified the Gerber as an appropriate knife for this purpose, and the kidney as the target.
We just didn't train with a knife.
We used tomahawks and saps.

Back to daggers, I think we have built up an unfounded mythology here, and I think we should view the different types of anti-personnel knives as different, meaning favoring different styles, and not better or worse in themselves.

------------------
Luke 22:36, John 18:6-11, Freedom

 
I like the Junglee Waterloo.It has a 7"blade,with a very nice rubberized full tang handle with cross cut slots and the fingers fall naturally into these when you grip the handle. The blade is well balanced, very light and quick in the hand. I also like the 2" of serrations on both edges for cutting rope etc. The blade is AUS-8 so it should do well near the salt water.

------------------
Ray Carr
 
I guess a dagger in my mind is a light weight and fast defensive device which favors a thrusting style, but provides some cutting ability. In many ways it is more a miniature sword than a knife. Hence ideal for trench fighting where space and speed are both at a premium.

Even though every time someone brings up the topic of daggers some squinty-eye type suggest sentry removal, I am not convinced that the dagger is an ideal tool for that mission. Yes, I've seen it done in the movies, but, IMHO The primary objective of sentry removal is to do so fast and hence silently. To immediately immobilize man or beast you will need to either sever or disable the nervous system, or cause such severe damage to the circulatory system so as to induce immediate shock.

Yes, it probably could be done with a dagger, but it would be far easier with a hatchet, kukri, or machete.
 
Not2Sharp- In responce to your comment about sentry removal being accomplished best w/ a Kukri, or Machete, this does seem logical but according to those who have "seen the Elephant" it really isn't. Often times a sentry will be wearing a helmet, have a rifle, radio, or other piece of gear slung on his back....this makes it very difficult to make a successful cut with a large blade. This approach is also fairly messy. The gentlemen I got this info from have the credential and training to back their statements, wether or not they've ever had to take out a sentry, I don't know and as a matter of curtesty didn't ask.
 
Most of the 'Nam vets I know (SEAL's and SF guys) swear by the Gerber Mark II for sentry removal. Its thin, double-edged blade is perfect for penetrating between ribs and ripping through the windpipe/arteries in the neck, and the L6 tool steel takes a razor edge. Just passing along information from those who have "Been There, Done That"...

------------------
"They sicken of the calm, who know the storm."
RFrost5746@aol.com or Robert_Frost@ars.aon.com

 
On the topic of sentry removal, why do this with a knife? The OSS had specially silenced carbines for this job, the SEALs could use a suppressed HK SOCOM, etc. Seems more reliable than either a dagger or a whack with a Smatchet of the like, and still quiet enough. I've been told it's not so much about silence as "a gasp is quieter than a shout or a gunshot."

-Drew
 
In the mid 1960's, everyone in my group of people coveted the Gerber Mk II, which at that time had a 5 degree bend in the flat.
Gerber could not make enough of them.
Since then, I have handled a straight Mk II, and it has too small of a grip for me.

Anyway, our teacher described the kidney as the proper target for the Mk II.
He maintained that only a kidney strike would silence and immobilize a person, given a knife as the weapon.
He said that cutting throats and stabbing down into the neck and shoulder made for a lot of struggling, and blood down the windpipe, which came back up with a lot of noise.
From my slaughter house experience, I can attest to the death struggle of pigs with their throats cut.
Our teacher described the tomahawk as the weapon of choice.

I agree with Not2sharp.
The dagger makes a good short sword.
Straight edged blades like the Arkansas Toothpick or the Case V42 do not "chop" or "hack", but they puncture deeply and draw cut forehand and backhand, making every movement damaging to the opponent.

Gene Osborn has put many hours into refining my 13.5" short sword so that it balances at the choil and yet will still strike with force in a whip cut.
I think of it as the same hand and wrist movement on uses to throw a baseball side arm.

Europeans carried daggers for centuries because they provided the greatest offensive/defensive potential in the most convenient package.

I just read how the real King Arthur, the Roman Dux Bellorum who provided the historical basis for the mythical King Arthur, carried a large dagger, or small short sword for everyday self defense, and not an Excalibur type Battle Sword.

On the modern battlefield, soldiers carry an assault rifle as their primary weapon; a tool knife like a leatherman for everyday chores; and I think they should carry a dagger or short sword like a Gerber Mk II, a Randall #2, or an Osborn/Cox Machaira for pure desperation.
You know, Chinese paratroopers and Grizzly bears.


------------------
Luke 22:36, John 18:6-11, Freedom

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top