Low cost weapons for self defense ... minimal loss if you ever have to use them.

[ooghost1oo]

I'm just getting back into the melee thing (been more into firearms for the past decade), and lots of research brought me to buy an M48 for $38.

I don't see much discussion about the lower priced hawks on here, aside from using CS hawks for mods; mostly high priced hawks from $400 or higher. But remembering a concept I learned not too long ago about firearms and self defense law brings me to throw a discussion topic out there.

When it comes to firearms, lots of enthusiasts end up buying really nice, really expensive guns, lots of mods, etc., but if they ever get into a firefight or defend the home, that firearm will be confiscated as evidence, and the process of getting it back can be really, really difficult. So I've seen many recommendations to stay cheap when it comes to defense and carry stuff, and learn to be really good with it instead. Which is why I have a great old Remington 870 at home instead of a fully tricked-out Saiga 12.

I'd say the same thing could be applied to these hawks and knives. As long as something is reliable in a fight, wouldn't you want to keep the investment small in anything that you'd actually be likely to use in real combat?

Obviously this doesn't apply to LEO or military who use their weapons regularly without them being taken away after an altercation.

 

[tueller]

I would argue that if you are forced to use deadly force because your life or someone else's life is threatened, the expense of the weapon lost should be your last concern. On a side note, the rem 870 is a great reliable tool no matter what it costs. For an economical hawk, look into to estwing's new line of tomahawks (one piece construction/ usa made). But as for "anything that you'd actually be likely to use in real combat", I would spend more because my life is worth more.

 

[VolundoftheForge]

I would argue that if you are forced to use deadly force because your life or someone else's life is threatened, the expense of the weapon lost should be your last concern. On a side note, the rem 870 is a great reliable tool no matter what it costs. For an economical hawk, look into to estwing's new line of tomahawks (one piece construction/ usa made). But as for "anything that you'd actually be likely to use in real combat", I would spend more because my life is worth more.

I have to agree. I'd rather lose a $600 tomahawk than have my United Tomahawk snap when I need it most. Also, I might be completely off on this, but if you contacted RMJ or Winkler and told them what happened, they're the kind of guys who may give you a discount on a second, or maybe even give you a new one free. However, I think if you were obviously in the right using your weapon for self defense and it's obvious you were the victim, they won't necessarily confiscate your 'hawk or other weapon.

 

[foxx]

I don't think that $400 is too much to bet on my life. If I had to use my Jenny Wren or my Ruger SP 101 for self defense, then they were taken away, so be it. They are replacable. They are still produced, so I could just get another one.
I'd rather not bet my life on my $20 SOG Fasthawk, even though in a pinch I'll use what I have. Granted, I've beat that thing, thrown it lots of times, and it still is in great shape, it's just not the best hawk for total confidence. Sure, it's light and fast, but it lacks a real cutting edge, and so does the spike. I guy could mod these to make it bite deeper. It's that bolt on handle, when will that fail? Just when I need it the most?
The method of constuction is something to consider. How well has it been tested? How much faith do you put into it to perform when needed? These are more important than the cost IMO.
I do understand the perspective, and being able to use whatever you have is important. I do like to have cheaper tools and weapons sort of stashed here and there. I keep a few things in my truck, like a Channel Lock #85 fence tool. It's a little bit hammer, a little bit curved spike, and would be good to swing while sitting in the car. Got it for $20, and I trust it more than I trust the SOG Fasthawk.

 

[Maniacal Pete]

If you get picked up for spiking someone with your tomahawk,
the cost of the tool is going to be inconsequential to the
cost of your misery.

 

[foxx]

If I can shoot someone that's attacking me, then why can't I spike them with a hawk? If I need to defend myself or family, I'll do what I have to do to stop the attacker(s) with whatever I have at hand.

 

[pbcg]

If I can shoot someone that's attacking me, then why can't I spike them with a hawk? If I need to defend myself or family, I'll do what I have to do to stop the attacker(s) with whatever I have at hand.

Because the DA will have a field day with you to show intent. That you acquired "special" or "usual" weapons and were looking for trouble. Where an ordinary shotgun like the 870 has many uses and doesn't suggest you are off balance looking for trouble. Not to mention it's probably the best weapon you can get for home defense.

I'm not saying you are but that's what can happen. No, its not fair but the way it is. I agree that cost should play no part in choosing a weapon that will save your life. Your familiarity and competence with the weapon is what matters most.

If you have the time do some serious research about the laws in your area and use that to help guide you.

Again I want to stress that I'm not saying you are looking for trouble but how many times have we read about the poor crack head with a ten page rap sheet who is killed by a citizen only to see them go after the citizen.

Their knife or gun collection just became the weapons "cache" found at the scene on in their home.

Every element of their life turned upside down to show they have some type of prejudice or vigilante streak.

God forbid you ever have to use force to protract yourself or your family. I really hope it never happens. I'm just saying to take these thing's into account.

 

[DJG097]

So would an axe make a better SD tool if somebody broke in? There isnt anything unusual about that is there? The way I see it if somebody breaks in to my house they better be ready to leave in more than one piece. Id still rather have a gun, but i dont so a CS pipe hawk and becker BK-9 will have to do.

 

[pbcg]

So would an axe make a better SD tool if somebody broke in? There isnt anything unusual about that is there? The way I see it if somebody breaks in to my house they better be ready to leave in more than one piece. Id still rather have a gun, but i dont so a CS pipe hawk and becker BK-9 will have to do.

There are too many variables in a SD or use of force situation to predict an outcome.

I was only offering food for thought. The question was asked why can I use one weapon and not another. I tried to show the other side.

Recently a man killed a child molester raping his daughter. They didn't prosecute him but there was talk at first that because he beat the man to death he may have gone too far and could have stopped short of killing him and they considered going after him. The issue that kept coming up is that as the law allowed if he had just shot the man he would have been completely within his rights to do so.

This is where the various laws get complicated and weird.

It's just something to think about and consider.

That's all I was suggesting.

 

[ooghost1oo]

I would never say a hawk or other melee weapon would be better for a gun for home defense. But, while I've been into mostly guns for a long time, I've gotten back into melee to round out my warrior training a bit more.

It's a fine point to completely disregard cost in favor of the best for defending your life. How often would we kill in intruder anyway, right?

 

[foxx]

So, if a man is on your daughter, how good of a shot are you? How do you go about shooting him without risking shooting your own child?
A melee weapon could be used in that type of situation to keep your loved ones safe. Just depends on what you have at hand I suppose.
It's difficult to have exactly the right weapon and take exactly the right action, and who's "right action" depends on subjective perspective.
I guess in court that one bullet that killed the bad guy is more civil than the one tomahawk spike? The jurors are thinking of Mel Gibson from "The Patriot" because that's all they know about tomahawks. And since Mel is crazy.....you must also be crazy....

 

[daisy cutter]

They didn't prosecute the man in Texas for killing the guy raping his daughter because they knew a jury in Texas would never convict. What it boils down to is what part of the country you're in and what values your area has.

 

[JayGoliath]

The jurors are thinking of Mel Gibson from "The Patriot" because that's all they know about tomahawks. And since Mel is crazy.....you must also be crazy....

This is funny.

On one hand, how many of us are trained with the hawks/knives IN THE DARK? Assuming that a burglary happens in pitch black and how well-maneuvered are you around the house without hitting yourself and possibly your loved ones?

My country laws look deeper into the potential weapon that we use provided we are still breathing and not lying on my own blood pool.
Worst the thieves came in empty-handed, picked up your kitchen knives/XX brand blades/axes (depending on how well you stored it/his savviness with blades), poked a few holes on you and left clean slate.

 

[Ta2warrior]

They didn't prosecute the man in Texas for killing the guy raping his daughter because they knew a jury in Texas would never convict. What it boils down to is what part of the country you're in and what values your area has.

This is true. In all cases, we must never assume that because we are the innocent and correct party in a defensive survival situation, that we are safe. Being scrutinized is par for the course, and they WILL try to squeeze culpability out of you. It is the towns, county's, state's, and country's job to do that.
Been there, done that a few times. It's insulting, goes against all common sense, and thoroughly sours you on the 'system'.
Just life in the US of A... litigious... insecure times.

Most states do not allow you to protect your property, and sometimes your family; they obligate you to run away. But that is changing very slowly.

Low cost but effective weapons use is a factor. I don't use cheap throwaways, as I like to ensure that my defensive tools are totally customized to me, and I will always use what I train with so it is second nature. If they are taken away because of investigation in a defensive altercation, then that is what has been expected.

Of course, I own at least two more closely identical backups, were that to happen again.

In my experience, dirtbags are way more afraid of my blades than my guns; it's a rather ironic anomaly.. but I always have both.

 

[Szilard]

I consistently read a lot of peoples legal insights on the internet, and I consistently feel that they are unqualified and often speaking from an emotional place. This isn't a jab at anyone in this thread - please do not think I am even commenting directly at one or more of the replies - I am not. But quite simply - legally - it is situational and it is always going to be situational. There will be clear cases where you could go into absolute serial killer mode and commit horrific atrocity and you would essentially be given an absolute free and clear because of the overwhelming and obvious threat to your life and the life of others. There are other instances in which the absolute greyness and lack of clarity in any direction will essentially leave you up in the air and at risk even if in the moment, you truly did do the right thing. Often times the evidence is lacking and decisions can be made for or against you in a very whimsical fashion.

As a result of this - I won't live my life by any virtues other than the ones that I am most satisfied with. The other circumstances are out of my control. That doesn't mean that I will flagrantly break the law...that would risk my freedom. But I will do what I think is necessary! If you use your 600$ Tomahawk and it saves your life...it will feel like the best 600$ you ever spent. You will pay it again in a heartbeat. What would you pay for heart surgery? Cancer treatment? What is the value that you place on you and your loved ones monetarily? Choose wisely and accept responsibility for your choices.

 

[trailmaker]

Because the DA will have a field day with you to show intent. That you acquired "special" or "usual" weapons and were looking for trouble. Where an ordinary shotgun like the 870 has many uses and doesn't suggest you are off balance looking for trouble. Not to mention it's probably the best weapon you can get for home defense.

I'm not saying you are but that's what can happen. No, its not fair but the way it is. I agree that cost should play no part in choosing a weapon that will save your life. Your familiarity and competence with the weapon is what matters most.

If you have the time do some serious research about the laws in your area and use that to help guide you.

Again I want to stress that I'm not saying you are looking for trouble but how many times have we read about the poor crack head with a ten page rap sheet who is killed by a citizen only to see them go after the citizen.

Their knife or gun collection just became the weapons "cache" found at the scene on in their home.

Every element of their life turned upside down to show they have some type of prejudice or vigilante streak.

God forbid you ever have to use force to protract yourself or your family. I really hope it never happens. I'm just saying to take these thing's into account.

This is a good point. If my home defense weapon is being held up in front of a jury, I'll fare better if it looks like granpappy's old hunting gun.