Blade and Bullet

[The Janitor]

Now you all came blame LT for this one. You see this little arguement debate came up when we were discussing what police officers in the UK and North America do when facing someone with a knife. I guess what really stirred things up was something only a dove would say and a response only a hawk would use.

"Shooting people is bad"
"So is getting stabbed."

So it pretty much brings us to the whole knife or gun more dangerous at arm's reach dealio. I have a feeling that it's going to be the same as my thread concerning fist loads. Emotional for the children arguements with me having to spell a good deal of stuff out. Before anyone can bring anything up I'm not a doctor, lawyer, cop, thug, soldier, etc. nor do I play one on television yet. Just a simple ranch hand, janitor, illegal plumber, repo man, bum, etc.

Arms length. Which is more dangerous? A gun or a knife.

[brocklesnarufc87]

Both are dangerous at arms length, which one is MORE dangerous, I wouldn't know. Yet I know that if someone is running at a cop with a knife, they have the right to shoot. What else are they going to do? Instantly become some prize fighter and disarm the person with their bare hands? Either that, or they could just stand there and hope the person with the knife isn't serious.

[The Janitor]

Oct 29, 2008 17:51:18 GMT -5 @brocklesnarufc87 said:

Yet I know that if someone is running at a cop with a knife, they have the right to shoot.

What else are they going to do? Instantly become some prize fighter and disarm the person with their bare hands? Either that, or they could just stand there and hope the person with the knife isn't serious.

Except for special groups police in the UK cannot carry firearms.

From what I've heard from "bobbies" the policy is stay away from the knife and negociate from a distance. A few, just like many other people (soldier, law enforcement, or not) have gotten lucky disarming someone armed with a knife using their hands or received "training" to do so. Unfortunately they let it go to their heads which may get them killed one day. Know it, fear it, and survive it.

Which is the more dangerous of the two weapons at arm's length? I'll still say it's the knife. Most people don't understand what a gun/knife can and cannot do which I personally blame on movies/television/anime. Even with a gun on my hip in the work place I wouldn't willingly go up against a knife at the distance mentioned above. One good cut is all it takes to put someone out of the action. Doesn't even have to be to a major artery.

[sbs]

In my personal opinion within arms length a knife is more deadlier becuase you rarely have to aim with a blade. Just stab and stab hard and the person has a big chance of bleeding to death. A gun, not so easy... You atleast have to bring the gun up. a knife you can start from a stationairy position and then lung and boom, 9 times out of 10 the knife is somewhere that's going to cause massive bleeding. A gun you have to aim, no aim, more than likely no fatal wound. So I'd say within arm's length, Knife.

[The Janitor]

Oct 29, 2008 22:49:26 GMT -5 @sbs said:

In my personal opinion within arms length a knife is more deadlier because you rarely have to aim with a blade. Just stab and stab hard and the person has a big chance of bleeding to death. A gun, not so easy... You at least have to bring the gun up. a knife you can start from a stationary position and then lung and boom, 9 times out of 10 the knife is somewhere that's going to cause massive bleeding. A gun you have to aim, no aim, more than likely no fatal wound. So I'd say within arm's length, Knife.

That's funny. You're partially right, but you didn't explain why. All this talk about aim. Try a wee bit of point shooting my man. I'm sure you'll enjoy the Speed Rock. ;D By the way just about any gunshot wound can be fatal. Any GSW without medical attention is the equivalent of AIDS. Almost the same with knives.

Lots of blood filled arteries and organs in the body. Most of them located where they're most likely to be hit by a knife or gun. Funny thing is most of them bleed out quicker if cut pretty clean than torn. That's what our main man here was hinting at the whole time.

Not to mention muscles, tendons, and nerve thingamajigs can cause you a whole lot of trouble if carved up like a Thanksgiving turkey. Going to be harder to fight over a weapon when you can't move or feel your arms. Personal experience says some damage is permanent.

Also guns don't go "Bang!" all the time.

[Samael]

Before I can debate about which one is more deadly. You need to consider this fact, at arms length lets suppose a man is holding a knife to me and I am holding a gun to him. Am I gonna shoot him once? Or am I am gonna unload the whole gun out on him and fill him full of holes? Then you also got to consider, what kind of gun is it and how big are the bullets?

Am I using a gun with a 50. calber bullet such as the Desert Eagle? Or am I using a gun with a smaller bullet such as the Jehrico with 9mm bullets? So really when it comes to arms length it all depends on the gun your using.. So what type of gun are we using guys at arms length?

[†The Blood Countess†]

It all depends really. Both can inflict serious damage if the weilder wishes it. If someone is within close range? You really don't have to aim. Just point and fire. Simple as that. Knife at close range? Stab and your target MAY be as good as dead. But like I said, it all depends *shrugs*

[devildriver]

Bullets for Sure

You can look lots of statistics on how new bullets and etc loaded every day into 9mm guns and such can penetrate Kevlar vests. There is a type of cop killer bullet that is effective even against the swat team personnel. Its made of fused titanium alloy rounds and can be loaded into tons of hand held guns as well as automatics. Its Interesting things, I will try and find the site for you though. Its a logical decision at arms length a knife would be a great deal less deadly than a gun.

A Knife to me is a lot easier to block when its only moving about 10-15 mph than a bullet that travels at the speed of sound. Especially at close range, those kinds of things would swing my vote towards the whole gun being worse thing.

[The Janitor]

Nov 14, 2008 14:16:39 GMT -5 Samael said:

Am I gonna shoot him once? Or am I am gonna unload the whole gun out on him and fill him full of holes?

Then you also got to consider, what kind of gun is it and how big are the bullets?

If you were dealing with someone like me you're probably just going to get one shot. Pistol... Will jam or not even fire. Probably going to feel the something metal biting into my hand before the bullet. Revolver... Same... Long gun issue is too much to cover...

I wish people would just get over it and just answer the fooking question. Red curtain of death falling over eyes due to stupid effin mentioning of a certain firearm with name starting with "D".

Nov 14, 2008 15:59:33 GMT -5 @devildriver said:

You can look lots of statistics on how new bullets and etc loaded every day into 9mm guns and such can penetrate Kevlar vests. There is a type of cop killer bullet that is effective even against the swat team personnel. Its made of fused titanium alloy rounds and can be loaded into tons of hand held guns as well as automatics. Its Interesting things, I will try and find the site for you though.

Its a logical decision at arms length a knife would be a great deal less deadly than a gun.

A Knife to me is a lot easier to block when its only moving about 10-15 mph than a bullet that travels at the speed of sound.

Funny thing about bullet type. When you go further for penetration you lose expansion. When you go further for expansion you lose penetration. Anyone can figure out what either are used for. Only when it comes to poking holes in people to make them die it's a very confusing issue. Funny reason why I hate the term "cop killer" applied to a certain bullet. All bullets can kill them.

Doesn't seem to be from what I've posted so far.

Can your arms/fingers move at the speed of sound?

[devildriver]

Its easier to move a finger than move the whole arm in my opinion. If he moves you still have to aim a bit, but at that range you still have a good chance of hitting them unless your blind. I have been shooting guns since I was about 6 or 7 when I would go hunting with my dad, so they are not the most complicated things to operate, and they do not have to be the most accurate. I figure even if he stabs you once in the stomach you can get 2-3 bullets off by then more might miss him, but at least that many will enter his body at that range. I mean an arm length is not a whole lot of distance but I figure some one with a gun has a greater advantage over some one who has a knife in my own opinion.

[The Janitor]

Nov 14, 2008 19:01:15 GMT -5 @devildriver said:

I have been shooting guns since I was about 6 or 7 when I would go hunting with my dad,

so they are not the most complicated things to operate,

I figure even if he stabs you once in the stomach you can get 2-3 bullets off by then more might miss him, but at least that many will enter his body at that range.

I mean an arm length is not a whole lot of distance but I figure some one with a gun has a greater advantage over some one who has a knife

Biggest influence on my life started shooting and hunting alone around that age. Off the top of my head they're well over fifty right now. Still doesn't get a whole lot of things when it comes to firearm technology.

Not that complicated to operate. Only compared to and if something goes wrong with one they're a whole lot more complicated than a knife.

Surprised you didn't try taking my "If you were dealing with someone like me you're probably just going to get one shot." to task.

I'd consider it a major disadvantage.

Quick questions for you since you hunted. What type of bullet did you use, why did you use that type, and how many deer have you killed? Last question can just be a WAG (wild a** guess).

[sbs]

Nov 14, 2008 15:59:33 GMT -5 @devildriver said:

A Knife to me is a lot easier to block when its only moving about 10-15 mph than a bullet that travels at the speed of sound. Especially at close range, those kinds of things would swing my vote towards the whole gun being worse thing.

Yes, but it's becuase of that volocity at arms reach a gun is almost useless. Think about it, you gain all that volocity from one bullet, within arms reach that bullet is going to enter and exit the body. Rendering pain to the man with the knife, the man with the knife who is going about 10-15 mph has a better advantage becuase unlike a bullet that has alot of volocity behind it and the momentum to carry it through the body. A knife does have that much momentum and thus can stay in the victim and if fucked with in a certain way will mess up alot of things that the janitor listed. In my opinion, the only time a bullet is good at arms reach is if you can raise your arm fast enough to put a bullet in the victim's skull before they plunge that knife into a fatal area of yours. And within arms length? That is a BIG IF[/u]

[The Janitor]

Nov 15, 2008 9:51:52 GMT -5 @sbs said:

Yes, but it's becuase of that volocity at arms reach a gun is almost useless. Think about it, you gain all that volocity from one bullet, within arms reach that bullet is going to enter and exit the body.

In my opinion, the only time a bullet is good at arms reach is if you can raise your arm fast enough to put a bullet in the victim's skull before they plunge that knife into a fatal area of yours.

I wouldn't say that. Like I mentioned above when it comes to poking holes in people to make them die it's a very confusing issue. There has been sooooooooooo much written and said about it's hard to believe anything. If a bullet traveling at a high velocity is useless we'd still be using black powder firearms. Only we're not. General chit-chat on the issue says if you're using a little bullet it better be traveling at over 2000fps. Hard to, if not impossible, to pull off in handguns. Rifles takes us back to a certain issue no one but myself has hinted at. Still it comes back to an opposing view that a bullet traveling that fast isn't going to do that much good. Not unless it hits bone on the way in/out.

Comes back to what I just typed and what somebody said about putting more than one bullet in the guy with the knife. Only I'm going to let everyone else figure out what I've been hinting at for a while. Even then there is a good chance putting more than one round in the guy isn't going to kill him before he kills you. Then again there is a good chance it will. Too confusing to say. I've heard plenty of stories. One where I guy has a run in with the cops, takes a shotgun slug to the chest, gets away from the fight, and survives it. Two that involves a .22 and .25 bullet bouncing off someone's skull. Plenty where many a guy goes down from standard 9mm used by military. A few where a guy goes down from a single .22 lr bullet to the chest. Neither of those cartridges are known as a fight stoppers.

As for the talk about bullets traveling over the speed of sound. Not all do. If I'm right and the speed of sound is somewhere close to 1125ish fps.... My comment concerning the speed of sound with hands/arms has to do with the reaction of time of a person carrying out a certain task.

[Samael]

What if you had a minigun? Then if I had to pick blade or bullet I would pick bullet.. Cause a minigun shoots several thousand rounds of bullets a minute.. So then you would be deffinately dead >.> <,< Yes I took it to the extreme but I like my miniguns.. :: Strokes it :: Yes, you are my preciousssss.

[The Janitor]

Gatling gun or not. They'll be all over you and out of harm's way like white on rice in a glass of milk on a paper plate in a snow storm.