Ten commandments of knife use!

Bram Frank says it best...

The 10 Commandments of Steel

1) Steel cuts flesh: always

Knives always cut flesh. That’s what they are designed to do. For over a million years the principle has stayed the same.

2) One cannot change rule #1

Since you didn’t write the rules, and the rules follow the law of physical science, you can’t rewrite the rules or change them.

3) Unless one has a blue suit with a big red "S" on it, rules #1 & #2 ALWAYS apply!

If your skin is stronger than steel, and your name is SUPERMAN, and you are able to withstand a "speeding bullet" then you can ignore rules #1 & #2. Otherwise rules #1 & #2 apply directly to you!

4) The principal of a knife: an edge that cuts flesh has NEVER changed

Knives have been used for over a million years. They were designed to cut flesh. They still cut flesh as effectively today as back then. It is mankind’s oldest friend and the principle is as good now as then!

5) Always lead with the edge, thrust with the point

The edge is what cuts, so use it! The tip or point is used to pierce flesh so thrust it out there towards the target!

6) Grip is determined by range, not arbitrary decisions or reasons: range is determined by length of the weapon.

How one grips a knife is dependent on where ones hand is in relationship to one’s opponent at best. Sometimes grip is whatever immediately comes to hand! The longer the weapon the greater the range: the shorter the weapon the closer the range.

7) Disarming an opponent who has a knife is unrealistic!

Try sticking your hands into a whirling blender. The only thing disarmed is your fingers, which literally get dis-fingered! Or your fingers become finge’s with R & S on the floor!

8) Weapon accessibility is paramount: no access no usage

This is a no-brainer. If you can’t get to your knife its useless!

9) Using steel is very serious: "I was in fear for my life."

One doesn’t play or threaten with a knife. You only use it because you fear for your life! It can be a deadly tool!

10) One person drips, the other gushes, quickly becomes one person gushes, the other sports a "toe tag".

The confrontation that you’ve scripted in your own head, can quickly get out of hand. A confrontation using knives can and will turn deadly very quickly! Everybody can LOSE!
 
VampyreWolf: stated "It can be a deadly tool!"

Knives are always considered dangerous/deadly weapons, thats why they are included in the dangerous weapons statutes of the states in the USA.

Disarming a person with a knife is not unrealistic. It takes training, timing, practice of the techniques. Not to say you won't take a hit but you can certainly disarm if you have the knowldege and timing, and at the same time minimize potential damage to ones self. The alternative is to no nothing and take the hit.

Is it dangerous? of course!!
Is it unrrealistic? Probably for most from the answers I receive to questions on the various knife forums about their training with blades or lack thereof.

Also stated was "Grip is determined by range"

I think it is more that range is determined by grip, blade length. To think grip is determined by range, one would expect the person with a knife to know how to get into reverse grip and back to sabre dependant on distance to the target. As most have no knowldege of how to perform this I wouldn't expect their grip to be determined by range but the other way around.

Brownie
 
brownie0486
Occupation: defensive knife instructor

I'd like to see how you'de explain to Bram as to how his views and system doesn't work as described. As I have no idea as to your business flow, I can only say that I guess Bram has a few times more people through his course in a year than you do. He also trains military and leo...

Now, as to my personal views? Given about 30secs of watching someone move, you can usually have a fairly decent eval done. This gives range and skill usually.

A knife is considered a tool up here, unless used otherwise. Just as a screwdriver or a pen can be turned to "weapon" in the same situation.

Disarming depends on the opponent. even an untrained person will be difficult, given reflexes. Not impossible to do, but difficult none the less. The vast majority of people using a knife in a confrontation are usually single handed(ie not ambi, just right or just left), and lack a wide range of movement in thier strong hand wrist, and little to none in off hand. Even me, who was born left(finally asked my folks about it), forced right in school, and got left back in 5yrs of work... I still lack some range in left wrist. I can write, but have a hard time spinning a baton around my wrist.

If you go by "range determined by grip & blade length", do you not change grip by range? Sabre or hammer for "out fighting"(long range, kicks and such), reverse for "in fighting"(holds and punches) or grappling?... I do grip-change drills, and can do it without thought, either hand. Draw, change up to 10x, and replace knife without looking/feeling(at knife or sheath). Doesn't matter as to if I have it set up for sabre or reverse(edge in or out).
 
I've been in a class with Bram while he attended a Keating seminar, so yes, I not only know of him but have met and trained with the man as well.

I train Military and LEO personnel also, no big deal there, but apparently you think so or you would not have mentioned it.

Actually was LEO part time for 9 years so I know the drill.

He surely has more volume in students than I. The point being? Perhaps you were attempting to infer something on the lines of the more students the better the instructor? I don't see the correlation as relevant.

Hell, I know an instructor whose name you would recognize that didn't know didly about how to use or how to defend with a knife. He had quite a few more students than myself as well.

Though not a good anything with a knife, he was and still is a very good salesman.

I didn't mention anything about Brams ability with a knife nor anything relative what he teaches but you seem to be defending him for some reason which also isn't relevant.

I don't know where you hail from but if it is in the USA "up here", perhaps you should check your states laws relative knives. You will likely find that the "knife restrictions" fall always under subsections of the "dangerouds weapons" statutes.
Though I'm not familiar with Canadas laws relative knives and their restrictrions, it would be of note to show us here in the US that law which states something radically different from our own state laws in the uS.

You state that "A knife is considered a tool up here, unless used otherwise" I assume there are no tool restrictions but may be some knife legislation somewhere about if researched, particularly here in the US where knives are definately not considered anything but dangerous weapons and listed and restricted thus in those laws.

To answer your reply "If you go by "range determined by grip & blade length", do you not change grip by range?

I stated: "To think grip is determined by range, one would expect the person with a knife to know how to get into reverse grip and back to sabre dependant on distance to the target"

Sure I can change grip by range easily, as well it appears yourself. Like you I practice the drills and have no issues with left hand to right/right hand to left; sabre to reverse and back, etc.

Blade manipulation skills are fine to know and be able to perform. They impress people immensely. Takes all of 10 minutes to show someone and a few full days of practise to be fairly decent at it.

Will I be a "wild razor whirling dervish alt force combat instructor!" when attacked? Moving the blades position in my hand from sabre to reverse as I catch his stance, grip, distance, determination? If I have the time and he has asked to dance?

The answer is NO, I won't be. Not because I can't be but because I will be concentrating on his knife in the grip I find myself in when I retrieve it. I will be holding the knife tightly as I know from training they are easily dislodged from most people even when the holder is not moving it around in his hand.

I will not be the aggressor even in defense of myself. I don't have to be to survive and it makes it a whole lot easier on the pocket book as I will be avoiding potential charges by being defensive in posture.

The point about the manipulation of blades while fighting was this-----you and I may be able to do these drills and dance around looking pretty. Others do not have that knowledge nor is it relevant in a true blade battle where both opponents are faced off as in a dual.

I never take my feet off the ground except to move normally or from under me at anytime. Kicks?
In a knife fight? Giving access to ones limbs by reaching out isn't what my people get. They also learn to keep their feet under them.

I have no idea of your background in staying alive in the real world but please feel free to check the bio at www.folders-r-us.org

Everyone is a product of their environment. The sum of which includes where one has been in the past. There is no right or wrong way as anything will work under the right circumstances.

Therein layes the question--what set of circumstances have a greater chance of ocurring if I am to come under attack by a knife.

Showing aggression [ how fast you can and do move to the target ]in defending will in most scenarios get you some jail time if you injure the initial aggressor. Those skills are the "dark side" of the blade arts.

Good that you know them, bad if you go to using them aggressive moves. This has been hashed on other forums about what constitutes defense if attacked. You have the right to defend, if you start backing him up by running at him you are now the aggressor.

I don't want my students to have to do this and once they have the defensive skills no longer need to. I understand the mindset and it is valid to a point, but it is also walking a fine line to jail if you "do" the guy.

Brownie
 
here in the US where knives are definately not considered anything but dangerous weapons and listed and restricted thus in those laws.
Click to expand...

In Oregon, and I only know about Oregon, it's not always clear. Some knives are always weapons. Double-edged knives are a good example. But others depend on context and actions.

A Benchmade AFCK Mini carried in the pocket of someone engaged in robbing a bank will probably be considered a weapon. The same knife carried in the pocket of a person installing telephone wires will probably be considered a tool.... unless he uses it as a weapon, threatens someone etc. A Leatherman Micra can be considered a weapon if its used as a weapon. But it's unlikely to be considered a weapon if it's simply kept in an otherwise peacefull lady's purse.

Here on bladeforums.com, we prefer to assert that knives are tools unless specifically designed and intended as or specifically used as a weapon. It's a semantic exercise... but in the world of politics (and the legality of knives and knife ownership is a political matter), words are very important. Words are the battle field. Just as a general on a military battle field tries to take his opponents land, just as he tries to deny his opponent access to strategically-important areas, so on the political battle field our enemies will try to take our words from us, they will try to assign new meanings to our words, and they will try to deny us the words we want to use. They wil try to redefine "knife" to always mean "dangerous weapon of mass destruction (there is a bill in the Washington State legislature right now that will define any gun capable of firing more than one successive shot as a weapon of mass destruction)," and they will try to deny us such phrases as "peaceful tool."
 
I have broken #1 a few times and you are right about #7. I think you covered everything pretty well.
 
I don't believe there is semantics involved, actually the states are pretty clear that knives are regulated under the dangerous weapions statutes.

No matter what we may feel is right or wrong about it, the law is fairly clear. They are not covered under some "tool" law, but under the dangerous weapons statutes of the various states.

People here can choose or prefer all they want that what they carry are tools. They are tools, knife tools, and if everyone can recognize the fact that they are regulated/restricted to whatever degree that state deems proper for it's citizens we can then work within the restrictions and guidelines set forth by the state/feds, etc.

In Oregon, I think you'll find all knives fall under the same statute, just some types are restricted. Unless you can find some "tool" law that covers knives I'm sure they will be listed as "dangerous weapons" and restricted or allowed based on that statute.

I use them as tool as well, and prefer to call them as such myself, but we better learn to deal with the fact the states consider them dangerous weapons. So, look up the statutes of yoru states and tell me if you find any knife related restrictions that fall outside anything but the dangerous weapons laws.

If a knife is not restricted from possession and carry it is still defined as a dangerous weapon, it just isn't restricted from use, carry, etc. The laws are quite specific about this. People can dance around the issue or face it head on.

If anyone finds their states laws relative knives under a "tool" statute I'd be happy to get the chapter and subsection from them.

Brownie
 
After some research I found this relative oregons regulation of "knives"

Oregon - Public Order Offense 166.240 Illegal Concealed
Weapon... [it is a Class B Misdemeanor to carry] concealed
upon the person any knife having a blade that projects or
swings into position by force of a spring or by
centrifugal force and commonly known as a switchblade
knife, any dirk, dagger, ice pick... or any similar
instrument by the use of which injury could be
inflicted... [it is also an offense for a convicted felon
to possess a switchblade or gravity knife.]

So we see that knives [ classes of knives ] are restricted under "concealed weapons" laws. Knives not listed as restricted under that statute in Oregon would be legal to carry/possess but fall under the same statute [knives as weapons] or knives not restricted as weapons.

Further comment is welcome.

Brownie
 
"7) Disarming an opponent who has a knife is unrealistic!"

brownie, i think what bram meant was possibly something based on the assumption that attacker and defendant are somewhat on the same skill level. of course, if a baby attacked me with a knife, i could disarm it. however, i'm pretty sure if you for example attacked me with a knife, i'd have a really hard time disarming you.

know what i mean ?

cheez
 
One more:

* Don't throw your knife unless you are prepared to throw it away.

n2s
 
richardallen :

Bram hasn't posted on this thread to my knowledge. It was the handle "VampyreWolf" that posted about what he believes Bram mentioned in a class he may have attended with Bram [ or so goes his inference ].

Attackers and defenders are rarely on the same level in edged combat, unless both know nothing at all.

The training required and hours of practicing the timing of the techniques to survive an attack are something only a relative few possess and at that it's iffy at best. You should [ as well as myself ] expect to take some damage if attacked with a knife. The training only allows you to potentially minimize the damage incurred in the attack so that you can survive the lethal encounter.

Street crimes with knives usually involve combatants with litlle or no experience in bladecraft. Hence, if you have some defensive knife skills either armed with a knife yourself or unarmed against a knife you can be successful at surviving where most would fail in this same endeavor.

There is a general opinion of those who carry a knife that if they are involved in a defensive situation using their knife that it will be some classic "duel" with each opponent circling, and slashing out at each other, each waiting for the other to make a mistake.

From the experience on the streets and related incidents from PO's across the country as well as some civilians, a knife attack is not announced but a surprised/startled event where the defender is assaulted before they can get a blade into play themselves.

Knowing this, it is most important to know some reflexive unarmed techniques which can create greater distance which gives one time to access their own bladeware [if thats what they are to use]and equal the playing field.

When my research relative case histories from PO's and civilians being attacked was put together for the classes I instruct at S+W Academy in Mass. it became evident most were not aware they were about to be attacked until they were. They had no time to draw firearms or knives. Most got stuck good and some died [ as related by other officers at the scene and aftermath of the investigation during interviews of witnesse].

Some of the deaths were preventable but the person attacked was complacent in attitude as they were "heeled" and believed they could react in time to a threat by knife. These people learned the hard way, I'm attempting to bring the realism of the attacks to officers across the country so that students need not make the same false conclusions that they were safe. The safest defense against the knife is distance. Officers interview people at contact distance and haven't a prayer of pulling the gun in their defense.

This goes as well for civilians who think " The idiot brought a knife to a gun fight" That false sense of security has and will continue to get people killed by knives unnecessarily. It is with great satisfaction at the end of a three day with the boys when they come up and admit they never knew a knife could be that dangerous and did not consider them as such while working the streets.

The classic knife to knife duels rarely happen on the street. Most who will be defending are given no prior warning of the attack and will not have the time to access a weapon themselves. If they try to access while under attack they become victims pretty quick.

When you take my class you get unarmed against a knife first, as thats how you will likely find yourself [ unarmed, as in nothing in your hand ] when it starts. There are those who think it will be knife to knife because they carry with that purpose in mind. Case history from the streets proves different.

When men and women get to a certain level of proficiency in defensive blade work they are not apt to be the thugs on the street. Men who seek the bladearts knowledge with anger or vengence in mind if and when they are ever attacked live in the "dark side" of the bladearts and give others and the community of knife carriers a bad reputation.
They choose to train for and train others in the dark side where they become the aggressors in the name of self-defense. There are many men and a few women who are sitting in jail cells contemplating their actions and regretting they chose the wrong path.

I'm not trying to disarm, just survive the initial first second of the attack. If you can't survive the first second, you probably are going to be resting on a slab in the morgue soon.

Brownie
 
When you're talking weapons laws, you're talking about criminal law. Criminal law does not exist just in law books. Criminal law exists in case histories, in appellate history, and in the opinions of prosecutors. It's not as simple as "looking up the law." If you strictly read Oregon law, a common #2 pencil is a deadly weapon no different than a gun or a knife.

In fact, if you get far beyond "stop for red lights and proceed on green lights," this thing called "the law" is rarely black-and-white -- or red-and-green as the case may be. "The law" is a ubiquitous, shapeless mass that's constantly changing, contantly being shaped by public opinion and by politics. We need to be part of that shaping process. If we want our knives to be made illegal, we should start referring to them as dangerous weapons of mass destruction.

Historically, I use a knife as a tool at least five times every day, often dozens. Thousands of times a year. I'm probably approaching a quarter of a million uses of a knife as a tool in my lifetime. I have used a knife as a weapon only once. 250,000 to 1. The overwhelming evidence is that my knives are tools, not weapons.
 
You may use it as a tool, it is still already classified as a dangerous weapon by the states.

They are not called dangerous weapons of mass destruction, thats a term you have used [and gave the antis more ammunition at the same time].

Stated was [ "The law" is a ubiquitous, shapeless mass that's constantly changing, contantly being shaped by public opinion and by politics.]

Actually the law is in black and white, it is how it is interpreted [ the greay area ] by the courts on a case by case basis. There is no leeway in the courts to consider a knife a tool when the books say it is considered something else [ a deadly/dangerous weapon ].

We can call them a tool all we want, the cop that arrives on the scene will be listing it in his report as a knife that you used not a tool, as thats what it is.

People who play semantics with the wording in an attempt to show they did not use a weapon but used a tool are in for a big surprise in the court systems.

Granted, some jurisdictions look differently at similiar cases than others, thats their own interpretation. Show me any case law where a knife was used in defense of ones self where the courts allowed evidence that it wasn't a knife but a tool. Or maybe any perp on the street who used a tool to attack another.

They are knives, there are statutes which deal with these objects as dangerous weapons and they prosecute under the dangerous weapons statutes where relevant [ because they are knives ].

How you use a knife is not the actual description of the object.

BTW--case law is the courts interpretation of the circumstances revolving around a specific case or set of circumstances in that case. Case law does not change the the objects description. It could, but it doesn't.

Again, please show any case law where a knife is not called a knife but a tool.

And to clarify another point here statede by another that some knives are considered dangerous weapons. All knives whether restricted or not, by law, fall under the dangerous weapons statutes. Doesn't that tell you something? Knives, their restriction from carrying in public or lack of restrictions changes only what is allowed to be carried and what is not. It never changes the knifes description in the statute.

I think many are confused that if a particular knife isn't restricted that it isn't considered a knife. Thats not correct. A knife is a knife [ not a tool ], some designs and lengths ahave restrictions of various kinds, some don't.

Brownie
 
They are not called dangerous weapons of mass destruction, thats a term you have used [and gave the antis more ammunition at the same time].
Click to expand...

Thank you for noticing.

Yes, that is a term I used. I'm glad you picked up on it and I'm glad that you recognized my intent. Words do matter.

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, there is a bill before the Washington State House right now (I'm told it hasn't a prayer, but it's there anyway) that would classify any gun capable of firing more than one successive shot as a "weapon of mass destruction." And you thought that the ten-round magazine limit was annoying... So, maybe my reference to a knife as a "weapon of mass destruction" isn't so far-fetched? Maybe it won't be so long before we see the "antis" trying just that?

There's an old saying, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." "Weapon of mass destruction." It's just words. Words can't hurt you. So why are you objecting to my use of those words?

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. On the military battle field, that's true. But on the political battle field, words are the weapons. They can hurt you. And it's important that we be careful about our use of them and about how we permit others to use them.
 
Wording does not change the fact a knife is a knife and not a tool according to the laws on the books which have been there before you and I were born.

Knife laws date back to the 1830-40 era in the deep south of the USA where they [ large Bowies ] were carried by most everyone in those locales. They were carried as weapons and used as tools to survive and defend.

How we choose to describe something, or have our atty: describe it in the hopes that others won't notice won't matter too much to a jury who listens to a case where the defendant is attempting to tell them his knife was a tool and not a deadly/dangerous weapon.

The judge will have no recourse but to state the laws relevant in that case to the jury. It's a knife and they have been restricted and considered dangerous weapons in one form or another for over 150 years. Plenty of case law in the various states to support that fact as well.

I take no offense to your using the term WMD where a knife is concerned. To be considered such, the knife would have to be shown to at least have been used to kill many people at one event/time enough in the past to be reclassified as such.

Not many cases I'm aware of where someone used a knife to kill 10 people on a train, plane etc like a gun has been used. If you are aware of any, let me know. This would not include the 9-11 debacle where they used box cutters as the box cutters were not used as WMD but as a threat to take control of a plane which became the WMD.

You don't have to admit your knife is a dangerous weapon, the courts have already decided what you have in your pocket is such. The one in your pocket may not be restricted but it is a knife nontheless, and knives are "dangerous weapons". You may use it as a tool like a prybar, it doesn't then become a prybar by morphing. It is still a knife.

Brownie
 
The internet a place where over zealous husbands get together(ie because their wives are tired of repetitive harangue) and defend silly points.:D :D

This scarcasm applies to myself as well.:D
 
All the knife laws I have read there is allways one weak point: the definition of knife is missing or synonyms are used. Some of the weirder edged things could easily argued not to be "knives".

I guess all here have a good mental image of what is a knife but try defining it!

;) I blame the anglo-saxon culture for some of this problem, here knives were tools until some idiot bureaucrat read in english that it should be a weapon.

TLM
 
If it weren't for Sal, Dave H. and some others lending knives for the passarounds some of us would have missed out on some knice knives.

That should be ammended to "You should never lend your knive to an unqualified person" much as I wouldn't lend my gun to an unqualified person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top