Why buy a Tomahawk when. . .

Vanguard.45 said:
To Stage 2:

By "I do this for a living", I hope you don't mean you shoot people for a living and then go to trial. Just kidding!

I think the thing I and others were alluding to was not the actual USING of the tool to defend one's life, but rather, the perception of a jury during a civil trial following the tragic event where the defense attorney asks you if you think it is normal for someone to keep a "Bloody Deathdealer Tomahawk" close by wherever they might go, and why such a tool is so named???

It's just that the average Stanley is much more readily explainable, whereas some hawks are touted as being able to penetrate kevlar helmets and the like. A defense attorney would look up a video of one of these tactical hawks and show it to a jury and explain how it was this ability to penetrate and crush skulls which motivated you to purchase it in the first place. That's a bit of a problem in a civil suit. The defense attorney will ask you if you had seen the video, which was probably on the website where you ordered the hawk, and then ask why you chose to hit the poor deceased so hard knowing that a much lighter blow would have probably stopped the threat. That's how defense attorneys work, and while you might think you could explain it away to a jury, you might find it a bit riskier than trying to explain why you picked up your trusty old camp hatchet which had been purchased at Wal-Mart and kept in the truck for camping trips. Why add to the risk of liability??? Lethal force is lethal force, but we can't tote around just anything (i.e. daggers, grenades, tomahawks, etc.) just in case we run into problems. However, we are allowed to have hammers and hatchets and other TOOLS in our vehicles because people see them as "less threatening" for whatever reason.

I always thought it was odd we could carry pens and pencils onto airplanes, but not pocket knives!! Seems like I could do a bit of damage with such things if I were of that ilk (which I am not).

To Vector 001:

Great response, and your knowledge far exceeds my own. Approximately how much would one of those fancy hawks run the average neophyte??

Thanks to all!

Vanguard.45
Click to expand...

I can't help but wonder if this is how you make decisions in your life. I think that you may be over thinking the whole hawk thing. Find one that appeals to your sense of aesthetics and purchase it. I wouldn't worry about hitting a bad guy over the head with it. The chance of you needing your hawk for that reason in this country are slim indeed. If you do need to protect yourself with it, I imagine that your life is in danger. Hawks are perfectly legal tools to own. Just go buy a hawk you like and kill air zombies and the occasional tree. It will be good for you.
 
Cpl Punishment said:
...There's plenty of good reasons to buy a 'hawk other than just for the much-promised zombie invasion.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't buy, collect, or putz around with hawks for defense. I'd hate to have to defend myself with a hawk...a fight with a hawk would be a messy...brutal...affair. :grumpy: Nay, I'd much rather have a reasonable situational awareness so that I'll be gone when nasty stuff is afoot. And live to mod another day...eh? The reason I buy a hawks is to slay the Jones Monster.

I got these two going out this week for CHRISTmas presents! Then it's onto building me own GSM1 ZombieSlayer Limited Edition (Z.L.E.).
smileyspin.gif


xmas1.jpg


xmas2.jpg
 
762 shooter said:
...I wouldn't worry about hitting a bad guy over the head with it. The chance of you needing your hawk for that reason in this country are slim indeed...
Click to expand...

If he needs to hit someone over the head with his hawk the there are several needs that are gonna come into play...

1) He's gonna need a bucket, a mop, a whole bunch of time, and a strong stomach to clean up the mess.

2) He's gonna need to examine his life and why he allowed himself to be placed into a ninja hittin' someone over the head situation (N.H.S.O.T.H.S).

3) He's gonna need a whole bunch of money to pay a lawyer.
 
...and a big book of excuses for why he didn't bash the bad guy in the kitchen where it's easier to clean it up instead of the bedroom with the plush white carpet.
I personally buy what appeals to me.Hawk,knife pack,stove whatever.personal taste means a lot in a world of diversity.This place would be pretty boring if it were"Stanleyforums.com".
 
savagesicslayer said:
...and a big book of excuses for why he didn't bash the bad guy in the kitchen where it's easier to clean it up instead of the bedroom with the plush white carpet.
I personally buy what appeals to me.Hawk,knife pack,stove whatever.personal taste means a lot in a world of diversity.This place would be pretty boring if it were"Stanleyforums.com".
Click to expand...

i think bedrooms with plush white carpet are the REAL scary things....

:eek:

vec
 
some good tactical tomahawks like the TC are made for more urban use, cutting metal and crazy stuff like that.
for like breaching doors and stuff.(in case you ever have to breach doors)

other than that, hawks are lighter, better throwers and i think more versital.
=]
 
Great Responses (and witty, too!!!)

Your wisdom has bestowed some perspective upon me, and I am sure will assist others in their attempts to bridge the gap between the completely utilitarian and the indulgence of aesthetic perfection when it comes to purchasing a hawk, hatchet, wife, or whatever!

Much appreciated!

Vanguard.45
 
i think after you own and use a VTAC from ATC, you will never look for something like it, that is cheaper. it just wont stand toe-to-toe with it.
 
Any weapon that is a bit on the 'heavy' side will definitely smash a thug 'harder'...
But a heavier weapon will also take a toll on your wrist, elbow and shoulder...
Ergonomically, a hawk is superior for the user, and it can be moved FASTER while in action, too...
The weight of a hammer, axe, etc. is there to be more efficient as a tool, but when it is being used as a tool (hammering a nail or chopping wood), speed of the swing is not as critical...
In a fight, a weapon NEEDS to be more agile and fast in its motions...

Weapon: LIGHT weight for speed and ergonomics
Tool: HEAVY to make each swing more productive
 
reconseed said:
i think after you own and use a VTAC from ATC, you will never look for something like it, that is cheaper. it just wont stand toe-to-toe with it.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you are looking for... no doubt the VTAC has a proud heritage. I own a VTAC, a CS Norse Hawk, CS Trail Hawk, a long-gone Custom, a little Gerber/Fiskars axe, and a Swamp Rat Crash Rat - for comparisons sake. The VTAC is the only one with a sharpened spike. I personally prefer a hammer poll for a variety of utility and safety reasons.

If we are talking defense, many (most?) opinions bemoan the spike as a severe liability due to the chance of self injury during usage. Whether that usage is ugly, scuffling combat or more utility purposes.

The VTAC has its place. It is well built with a composite handle, but it also some very real, at the least, cautionary attributes and, at the most, liabilities.
 
Vanguard.45 said:
A defense attorney would look up a video of one of these tactical hawks and show it to a jury and explain how it was this ability to penetrate and crush skulls which motivated you to purchase it in the first place. That's a bit of a problem in a civil suit. The defense attorney will ask you if you had seen the video, which was probably on the website where you ordered the hawk, and then ask why you chose to hit the poor deceased so hard knowing that a much lighter blow would have probably stopped the threat. That's how defense attorneys work, and while you might think you could explain it away to a jury, you might find it a bit riskier than trying to explain why you picked up your trusty old camp hatchet which had been purchased at Wal-Mart and kept in the truck for camping trips. Why add to the risk of liability??? Lethal force is lethal force, but we can't tote around just anything (i.e. daggers, grenades, tomahawks, etc.) just in case we run into problems. However, we are allowed to have hammers and hatchets and other TOOLS in our vehicles because people see them as "less threatening" for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Like I said, thats totally irrelevant. Not to mention the fact that this doesn't happen. The paranoia that people on knife and gun boards have is totally irrelevant. If everything is kosher then you won't be sitting in front of a jury. If everything isn't, it won't make a tinkers damn of difference whether the axe you have in your trunk is a vietnam tomahawk or something from home depot.

The defense attorney will focus on the WHY and not the WHAT. Why you had it in your trunk (because you were itching to hack someone) is far more important and relevant than what you had in your trunk.

Again, there is a reason why no single case hinged on what brand the person was carrying. Its because even the most underhanded of defense attorneys knows that its an argument so transparent and easily defeated that its not worth bringing up.
 
STAGE 2 said:
Like I said, thats totally irrelevant. Not to mention the fact that this doesn't happen. The paranoia that people on knife and gun boards have is totally irrelevant. If everything is kosher then you won't be sitting in front of a jury. If everything isn't, it won't make a tinkers damn of difference whether the axe you have in your trunk is a vietnam tomahawk or something from home depot.

The defense attorney will focus on the WHY and not the WHAT. Why you had it in your trunk (because you were itching to hack someone) is far more important and relevant than what you had in your trunk.

Again, there is a reason why no single case hinged on what brand the person was carrying. Its because even the most underhanded of defense attorneys knows that its an argument so transparent and easily defeated that its not worth bringing up.
Click to expand...


i reckon that is close enough to the truth.

i'd rather be judged by twelve, than carried by six, any day.


....worse yet, ...seeing some one innocent hurt becuase i didn't do my part to stop the sick bastard.

i've been in deadly hand-to-hand, more than once - and once is too much...:)....


....i won (if ya can call it that), but i would've preferred to have had a hawk....

....and who knows? - it might've stopped him in his tracks and it would've gone no further.

....stay pure at heart, and it doesn't matter what the judge or jury thinks, God Bless Them - you know you are right, and responsible.


end the madness, refuse to roll over.


vec
 
Stage 2 and Vector 001 Great answers..
I personally do not buy anything with violence in mind. I get it because I like it !
If something does go down and a weapon would help myself or to help another, I'll grab anything convenient a shovel, rock, hammer, hawk ,etc..
And hopefully if a jury is needed it wont have any bleeding heart liberals in it..
Everyone please have a Great day !!!
 
Vanguard.45 said:
To Stage 2:
It's just that the average Stanley is much more readily explainable, whereas some hawks are touted as being able to penetrate kevlar helmets and the like. A defense attorney would look up a video of one of these tactical hawks and show it to a jury and explain how it was this ability to penetrate and crush skulls which motivated you to purchase it in the first place. That's a bit of a problem in a civil suit. The defense attorney will ask you if you had seen the video, which was probably on the website where you ordered the hawk, and then ask why you chose to hit the poor deceased so hard knowing that a much lighter blow would have probably stopped the threat. That's how defense attorneys work, and while you might think you could explain it away to a jury, you might find it a bit riskier than trying to explain why you picked up your trusty old camp hatchet which had been purchased at Wal-Mart and kept in the truck for camping trips. Why add to the risk of liability??? Lethal force is lethal force, but we can't tote around just anything (i.e. daggers, grenades, tomahawks, etc.) just in case we run into problems. However, we are allowed to have hammers and hatchets and other TOOLS in our vehicles because people see them as "less threatening" for whatever reason.
Vanguard.45
Click to expand...

Well people do not buy snub nose .357 Magnums, like the one I own, for pistol competitions either, for that people buy competition model 1911s and target rimfire pistols. The pocket guns and similar items are bought for conceal carry and personal defense purposes. Nobody argues, unless you live in the Amerika states, that your .44 Magnum snub-nose (worse yet Colt .500 super-mag, which eats kevlar) or .25 ACP automatic serves only one purpose and therefore you are looking to going around and murder folks.
The same would apply to any other tool, and that is what we are talking about, used especially for such purposes.
Conversely one could simply argue that they are not comfortable with firearms hence the melee weapon provides them with a good enough defense inside of a respectable zone of personal comfort, i.e. one is not comfortable with firearms argument. Nobody is going to penalize you for forsaking a pistol over a knife or anything else for your personal protection. In fact I bet there are some individuals who would applaud one for not wanting to make use of a personal sidearm.

BTW the large bore caliber handguns bought for protection are not purchased because they kill the attacker. They are bought because they stop the attacker cold in their tracks no matter what, and nobody expects any person outside of law enforcement to be proficient with a weapon. So hitting the person as hard as you could with a baseball bat when a lighter blow for example could stop them is a non-argument. It is like they say around here with regards to a handgun, if it is a semi-auto then * near empty the magazine and if a revolver fire two or three rounds. You are expected to be in a heightened state of fear when fighting for your life, and not to be Mr. Navy Seal I can hit a quarter with a throwing knife at 20 feet dead aim.

Remember folks in a self-defense trial, even in a castle doctrine state, you say you are trying to stop the attacker, not kill the assailant.
 
....don't sweat a thing, brother glock' - the jones-monster can never be slain and lives for eternity, while Mankind yet draws breath....

vec
 
doesn't the Jones monster kind of resemble the "Witch King" from Return of the King?? "FOOOOOOL, NOOOO LIVING MAN CAN KILL MEEEEEE..."
 
I would buy a hawk because life is too short not to indulge yourself a little.

I imagine I could live my life to the full without once having touched a tomahawk, katana, or suchlike. Weapons fascinate us. Owning and playing with such implements does in a little way fulfil the boyhood fantasies of being Hawkeye or Miyamoto Musashi. We wonder what it would have been like living in older, more turbulent times when man often met other men in close quarter combat.

My mom forbade the ownership of "weapons" when I was young and foolish. But now that I'm 37 (much older but still a little foolish) I can make my own rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top