Thread: Pro-knife/Anti-knife?

I'm doubtful as to how many people would really be able to effectively defend themselves even if they were allowed to carry knives; as I said in the other knife threads, self-defense with a knife is a pretty bad idea unless you are thoroughly trained. The right to carry a gun, not a knife, is really the key to effective self-defense. But, I feel for you. British weapons laws are the stupidest shit ever.

Originally Posted by benzss

Course a knife isn't a brilliant defensive tool, but my point is that it's up to the person to decide.

And yeah it's wank. But you know, I'm in a minority. When I try to argue otherwise, everyone points to America and says "well we don't want to be like that do we?"

shrug

"Be like that"? You mean have one-quarter the violent crime rate? Fuck me but Brits are dumb. If you ever want to move to the US, I will help set you up with mad guns and all. Not kidding, come on over. Jesus, fuck Britain.

Originally Posted by Syme

one-quarter the violent crime rate?

o.O
Citation?

Originally Posted by crunker

o.O
Citation?

With pleasure. Here is the Home Office's British Crime Report for 2005-2006: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0506.html. Follow the link for Chapters 7-8, then go to page 12 of Chapter 7 and look at Table 7A; you will see that England and Wales had a violent crime rate of 23 incidents per 1000 people, or 2300 per 100,000 people, in the 2005-2006 reporting year (which runs September to September, IIRC).

Now, here is the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Data for the last couple decades: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html. Go down to the bottom and look at the line for 2005. You will see than in 2005, at the same time the Brits were having 2300 violent crimes per 100,000 people, the US violent crime rate was only 469.2 per 100,000 people.

469 is about one-fifth of 2300. According to the official statistics provided by the US and British governments, Britain has roughly five times as much violent crime as the US. Bring this up next time someone tries to pretend that British gun control makes their country safer than ours.

Originally Posted by sycld

However, is it not also correct to say that using a gun for self-defense requires a good deal of training as well?

Yes, definitely; anyone who carries a gun for self-defense, and hasn't taken the necessary training, is being reckless and irresponsible. However, using a gun for self-defense does require less training than using a knife. A knife requires a particularly large amount of training to use effectively, because the nature of knives forces you get within arm's reach of your target and start what is essentially equivalent to a fist-fight, but with a deadly weapon thrown into the mix. It is, as you said, tantamount to a martial-arts type of activity. If you aren't absolutely able to control the knife in a hand-to-hand struggle, it's very easy for it to be taken away from you. A gun's ability to be used at range, and the extremely simple and easy way in which it can inflict a deadly wound, makes it a much less risky proposition. But yes, you should still make a point of getting the necessary training if you are going to carry ANY lethal weapon for self-defense. There is no lethal weapon that can be responsibly used without training.