Sword vs. Knife: a true story.

R

Revenant

Joined
Feb 3, 2001
Messages
72
Over the weekend a Miami news radio reported that a knife wielding maniac slashed several bystanders as he barged his way into his estranged girlfriend's apartment. He was able to get in, but the girlfriend put a stop to his rampage by skewering him with the weapon she had at the ready: a sword!!! The lady obviously knew who she was dealing with and just made sure that the loser brought a knife to a sword fight. True story, or so the media says.

------------------
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
 
Its true never bring a knife to a sword fight. I don't doubt the story. There is another story out of South Carolina within the last few months where one homeowner gutted an intruder with a sword. Recently the South Carolina governor said it was open season on home invasion robbers. You never know, we might see more homeowners taking up swords to defend themselves.
 
Robert's right- they'd just find a way to turn it around somehow and take away our right to own swords. For our own protection, of course. Its definitely best to keep a low profile, to stay under the radar as much as possible.

Mario

------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.




[This message has been edited by Gaucho (edited 02-23-2001).]
 
Are you guys saying that it's inappropriate to defend yourself with a sword? Personally, a sword wouldn't be my first choice if someone is attacking me with a knife but if one was readily available as I was being attacked, I would certainly use it.

I have a hard time believing that these scenarios listed above would put our swords in jeopardy. Generally when someone (especially a woman) defends themselves against an intruder in their home, the defender is looked upon as being totally in the right- if not as a hero.

It's sad to see this kind of thing happen at all but if a sword saves someone's life at the hands of such a blatant act of violence, I say that it's good thing.

Now, if we are talking about CRIMINALS, or dumba$$es walking the streets with swords, that's a whole other issue. People using swords to assault people would certinly put our weapons in jeopardy.


------------------
John Gonzalez
Exclusive Dealer
Mineral Mountain Hatchet Works
 
John,

The guys are concern about the publicity garnished by swords in these situations. It pulls swords up on the public policy agenda and may lead to the initiation of new measures to control their distribution. It doesn't matter who is right, or wrong, the mere fact that something is on the agenda will virtually guarantee that it will draw fire from some self serving SOB.

 
Unfortunately people like Gaucho are correct. It doesn't matter if the sword was used for defense of life or limb. It doesn't matter how justifiable the ownership or the weapon or use of the weapon is. All weasely liberals will see is that someone used a terrible nasty weapon and we all know that sort of thing must be stopped. Well unless of course the weapon is used by some poor, underpriveleged, misguided, serial, ax murderer and then we should be more understanding.
 
Let me explain my position a little bit.

Let's first transcend all the damn hypothetical defense scenarios, let's bypass all the "if I had to" stuff...

I wouldn't care if it was coincidence and someone used a sword to defend themselves. I don't applaud (edit: OR condemn) people who are trying to survive that way. However, I strongly look down upon the concept of buying swords solely for home or self defense. Firstly, I don't like the assumption that an attacker or intruder in a home is more likely to take my life than stress, health problems, and isolation. Beyond that, I don't like the thought of irresponsible and disrespectful folks getting swords for the wrong reasons. Thirdly, I don't appreciate people who think swords SHOULD be used on people because "that's what they were made for." Nor do I enjoy the notion that a sword is a prime choice weapon for defense in terms of intimidation. Before I list too many more of my reasons, I don't want untrained individuals hurting themselves or their loved ones.

There are more rational and effective equipment choices out there. Self defense brings no "honor" to a sword or the sword community. It is not "cool." It does not make a political statement about how responsible sword owners are. It should not inspire others to "join up in arms."

Encouraging and advocating swords as first-choice weapons for such purpose is irresponsible.

[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 02-27-2001).]
 
Robert, for someone so young, you are an amazing and refreshing source for well reasoned wisdom.

Para, tipping my hat to Shinryu

[This message has been edited by Paracelsus (edited 02-27-2001).]
 
Sorry it took so long to get back here.

Robert, I totally agree on all of your points about the use/misuse of swords. I suppose media relay of stories like these might prompt dullards to go out and buy a sword for self defense. That of course is not something that would be good for any of us. It seems like such a ridiculous notion- keeping a sword by your bed in case someone breaks in- that, as a rational mind, I have a hard time imagining anyone doing it. Of course just because we think it's silly (and sort of grotesque), that doesn't mean everyone shares our thoughts on the matter.

As far as bleeding-hearts using stories like these as fuel to step in and "take care of us" by trying to make swords illegal, my above notion of common sense also applies. How could anyone want to remove the right to own something based on the misdeeds of another? The answer is not clear, but examples of it are all around us, of course. So yes, I suppose some might find a new crusade in stopping the availability of swords because of this kind of story.

The real threat to sword ownership is their more blatant misuse, such as carrying them under a trench coat while walking through downtown. There are too many people who carry weapons for "self defense" that actively put themselves in ridiculous positions (with visions of Highlander dancing in their head). Then there is the occasional cretin who uses a Katana to commit crimes. Very rare, but it does happen.

The general population loathes this behavior and applauds the stories where a woman defends herself against a maniac (even in she happens to use a scary sword). With good reason, in my mind. When a would-be attacker is thwarted- especially by a woman- there is a sort of feeling of justice and accomplishment against what becomes a representation of all the bad stuff in society. The tabloid news and talk shows are filled with this stuff. Bring the heroic woman on stage and have her talk about how she defended herself against the rapist. Sensationalistic and a bit sardonic, I know, but we love to hear about beating the bad guy. And you'll see me applauding as well.

Let's not confuse the details here. We're not talking about "bad guys" misusing swords. We're talking about a lady who's life was in danger by a knife-wielding assailant. There is NO WAY any liberal media lord would condemn that lady or her sword. Let the paranoia flow- in THIS case our weapons are not in jeopardy. The liberal front is way too busy trying to take away a much bigger "menace"- namely firearms. Why? Because every day thousands of crimes are committed by blatantly "bad" people doing blatantly "bad" things.


------------------
John Gonzalez
Exclusive Dealer
Mineral Mountain Hatchet Works
 
I dunno about you but I sure am contented with the discussion
biggrin.gif
(waiting to see who that stirs)
 
Greetings All,

Robert and Kumdo...I agree with what you say. People carrying swords under their trenchcoats for "self defense" is not what we are looking for.

I did have an opportunity to read a couple of newspaper articles regarding the incident in question, and found their point of view a bit disturbing. In them, the local District Attorney is portrayed as a radical because of his supportive stance on homeowners who have successfully defended themselves against home invaders, apparently a growing problem in the area. In one article, the local LEO chief is quoted as saying that he could not believe that the District Attorney chose not to prosecute the woman who defended herself with a sword against her knifewielding attacker. Inconceivable, huh? But, sadly this is not an uncommon sentiment in today's law enforcement community.

There are many lawmakers, LEOs, and other policy makers in this country who clearly do not believe that individuals should have the right to defend themselves with weapons against a physical assault. That is the Real Politique of our situation. So, even though we, and even certain members of the media, may applaude this woman and others like her who refuse to be easy prey, there are those in power who clearly don't.

So, what's the answer? Where do we draw the line? How do we preserve our right to bear arms and defend ourselves and our loved ones in the face of serious opposition by some of our own leaders without returning to the Wild Wild West?

Mario

------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.

[This message has been edited by Gaucho (edited 03-10-2001).]
 
Wow. Very scary stuff. Gaucho, could you please site the article that you read about the police chief wanting to press charges against this woman? I'm getting the feeling there is more to this story if the local law believed she was not justified in using lethal force.

As someone who has many LEO friends, I can't imagine the scenario described above as being a case of excessive force or unjustified violence.

The whole thing makes me cringe.


------------------
John Gonzalez
Exclusive Dealer
Mineral Mountain Hatchet Works
 
Kumdo,

I'm sorry but I can't find the post that had the links to the newspaper articles. I'm pretty sure that it was on Jim Keating's Modern Knives Online, but unfortunately he just replaced everything with a new issue a few days ago.

Mario

------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.
 
When you study the Wild Wild west, you find that most of the "wildness" is dime novel exageration. And the killing that did go on, was mostly two punks shooting each other over a drunken quarrel or whatever. Most places back then in the West, a woman or child'd be safer than they would on the streets of New York or Los Angeles today.

Cheers,
Matt

[This message has been edited by Eliashan (edited 03-13-2001).]
 
Yup, the reality is that people are amazingly civil to one another when everyone is armed and dangerous if provoked.

Mario
 
Very interesting article. Did anyone notice this little tidbit:

"...faces aggravated battery and armed burglary charges."

What happened with "assault with a deadly weapon," "assault with intent to inflict bodily harm," or "attempted murder" charges?

It sounds like this psycho is getting off way too easy.

------------------
Glen AKA Centaur
"I'll be your Huckleberry."
- Doc Holiday
 
I certainly don't understand the lack of "attempted murder" charges either. The burglary stuff is the purest b.s. how many burglars go around stabbing everyone in a house instead of trying to steal stuff?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top