Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:01:34 -0400, H the K
wrote:

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:12:43 -0400, H the K
wrote:

From 10 feet away, if someone came after me with a knife in a fight and
I were holding my SIG X-5, he'd be on the ground dying from three taps
to the chest. Especially if the guy with the knife were an old fart. You
know, a guy your age or Gene's age.
IF it were me, you'd be dead before you even got the gun out of the
holster.
Holster? Who would have a firearm in a holster when facing an old marine
with a knife?

No one your age is faster than a speeding bullet...or three.

Harry - there are so many flaws in your argument that it's useless to
even begin to discuss it.

I honestly hope for your sake that you never, ever have to pull your
gun out to face a threat because you'd fold like a two dollar
cardboard suitcase.


That's right...I wasn't trained by...da marines.

Once again, "pulling" is not the same as having the pistol in one's
hand, finger on the trigger, pointing at a perp with a knife. Especially
an old perp who thinks he is a ninja.



--
A wise Latina makes better decisions than a dumb elephant.

On 7/22/09 3:43 PM, Calif Bill wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 22:55:25 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:36:04 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

just today. the victim was from St. Louis Mo.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/40830...ml?source=mypi

Guess what? One of them has survived.

Would that have happened with a gun? Nope.

He thought he had killed them both.

Bullets to the head would have made it for sure.

Glad he had a knife instead. 100% improvement on mortality rate.

Much more likely to die from a knife wound than a gun shot.

Right. Cite please.

Look it up. Most gunshot victims survive. Startling is it not? I was
taught this is the military silent weapons course. A knife wound, and I am
not meaning the nicked your hand with the knife while cutting apples, causes
massive bleeding. You die before they get you stabilized.




I feel that way every time I cut myself shaving.

On Jul 22, 11:09*am, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:12:43 -0400, H the K
wrote:



Yogi of Woodstock wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:36:30 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The fact that this study is flawed is found in the assertion "The
distribution of wounds is different for knife assaults and gun
assaults, since victims of knife assaults have more chance to dodge
and block," which is ridiculously untrue.

For those with proper training, inside of about 10 feet, I'll take the
knife and you can have the gun. I'll never lose and you'll never see
the knife.

Ahem - without getting into specifics, you are absoutely 100% correct.

B.S. Bravado.

From 10 feet away, if someone came after me with a knife in a fight and
I were holding my SIG X-5, he'd be on the ground dying from three taps
to the chest. Especially if the guy with the knife were an old fart. You
know, a guy your age or Gene's age.

Closer than 10 feet, you're assuming the guy with the pistola is
standing around and waiting for the perp and his knife to close in...

At one of my CCW classes the instructor demonstrated this. Nobody
could draw and fire an aimed shot before he got them, even from a
fannie pack, worn in front with your hand on the gun. The problem is
reaction time from the time you see the guy move until you start
moving. We are talking a fraction of a second here.
I suppose some of those cowboy action shooters can do this but they
train several hours a day *... and they know when it's coming.
I really do think he was trying to drum up business for his self
defense course since the answer was deflecting the knife, then
shooting the guy as demonstrated by his assistant.
My thought was if you are that good why do you need to shoot him? Just
take the knife away and stab him.

Behold Bob Munden:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0dYEjR-jA

On 7/22/09 6:07 PM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 22, 11:09 am, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:12:43 -0400, H the
wrote:



Yogi of Woodstock wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:36:30 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The fact that this study is flawed is found in the assertion "The
distribution of wounds is different for knife assaults and gun
assaults, since victims of knife assaults have more chance to dodge
and block," which is ridiculously untrue.

For those with proper training, inside of about 10 feet, I'll take the
knife and you can have the gun. I'll never lose and you'll never see
the knife.

Ahem - without getting into specifics, you are absoutely 100% correct.

B.S. Bravado.

From 10 feet away, if someone came after me with a knife in a fight and
I were holding my SIG X-5, he'd be on the ground dying from three taps
to the chest. Especially if the guy with the knife were an old fart. You
know, a guy your age or Gene's age.

Closer than 10 feet, you're assuming the guy with the pistola is
standing around and waiting for the perp and his knife to close in...

At one of my CCW classes the instructor demonstrated this. Nobody
could draw and fire an aimed shot before he got them, even from a
fannie pack, worn in front with your hand on the gun. The problem is
reaction time from the time you see the guy move until you start
moving. We are talking a fraction of a second here.
I suppose some of those cowboy action shooters can do this but they
train several hours a day ... and they know when it's coming.
I really do think he was trying to drum up business for his self
defense course since the answer was deflecting the knife, then
shooting the guy as demonstrated by his assistant.
My thought was if you are that good why do you need to shoot him? Just
take the knife away and stab him.

Behold Bob Munden:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0dYEjR-jA


Well, obviously Munden couldn't compete and win against SW "The Knife"
Tom, our aging ninja.


--
A wise Latina makes better decisions than a dumb elephant.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:36:30 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 23:53:47 -0700, jps penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 22:55:25 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:
|
|
|"jps" wrote in message
...
| On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:36:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim
| wrote:
|
|just today. the victim was from St. Louis Mo.
|
|http://www.seattlepi.com/local/40830...ml?source=mypi
|
| Guess what? One of them has survived.
|
| Would that have happened with a gun? Nope.
|
| He thought he had killed them both.
|
| Bullets to the head would have made it for sure.
|
| Glad he had a knife instead. 100% improvement on mortality rate.
|
|Much more likely to die from a knife wound than a gun shot.
|
|Right. Cite please.

It is a debatable point with no clear answers.... and I think the
*real* answer lies in statistics garnered from countries where knives
are more prevalent than guns.

The fact that this study is flawed is found in the assertion "The
distribution of wounds is different for knife assaults and gun
assaults, since victims of knife assaults have more chance to dodge
and block," which is ridiculously untrue.

For those with proper training, inside of about 10 feet, I'll take the
knife and you can have the gun. I'll never lose and you'll never see
the knife.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1993...ives-00000.php

Oh for ****'s sake Gene, you're assuming whomever is weidling the
knife is an expert.

Flawed logic.

The guy in this case obviously meant to kill both women but left one
alive. Sound like a knife expert to you? Neither of the women were
armed from what I understand.

Any dweeb with two hands and an arse can put a bullet through
someone's skull at close range. What's the chance of survival?

On 7/22/09 9:11 PM, Gene wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:08:54 -0700, wrote:
p

Oh for ****'s sake Gene, you're assuming whomever is weidling the
knife is an expert.

Flawed logic.

The guy in this case obviously meant to kill both women but left one
alive. Sound like a knife expert to you? Neither of the women were
armed from what I understand.

Any dweeb with two hands and an arse can put a bullet through
someone's skull at close range. What's the chance of survival?

And I suppose merely being in possession of a gun somehow imbues the
wielder with magical powers of perfect aim......

At 10 feet with a target the size of an adult human and some
considerable experience handling and shooting firearms?

You don't need perfect aim, just "decent" aim.






--
A wise Latina makes better decisions than a dumb elephant.

On 7/22/09 9:54 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:25:11 -0400, H the
wrote:

On 7/22/09 9:11 PM, Gene wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:08:54 -0700, wrote:
p

Oh for ****'s sake Gene, you're assuming whomever is weidling the
knife is an expert.

Flawed logic.

The guy in this case obviously meant to kill both women but left one
alive. Sound like a knife expert to you? Neither of the women were
armed from what I understand.

Any dweeb with two hands and an arse can put a bullet through
someone's skull at close range. What's the chance of survival?

And I suppose merely being in possession of a gun somehow imbues the
wielder with magical powers of perfect aim......

At 10 feet with a target the size of an adult human and some
considerable experience handling and shooting firearms?

You don't need perfect aim, just "decent" aim.

I suppose you haven't seen those police dash camera pictures where
trained police officers fire lots of ammo without hitting anyone.
What you can do on the range may not translate to what you can do in
bad light, when you are not really prepared and under more than a
little stress.

You can also have the problem with a 9mm or .38 that even a decently
placed shot won't stop a motivated perpetrator before he can get to
you. There are lots of places on the body, even in the head with no
organs that a hole in will cause instant death. It is possible to end
up dead next to your dying attacker.


I practice at a range used by cops, lots of cops, and some military
personnel, too. Once in a while, not often, I see a cop who knows how to
shoot, by which I mean he/she can put most of the rounds in a mag in the
"10" zone on a target at typical "combat" distances. Most of the cops
I've seen at the range are just terrible shots, which I take as meaning
they don't practice often or they don't care.

I'm aware of the vagaries of any situation. Other than the "fun" factor,
that's why I practice quite a bit at the range and other places where I
can shoot.

Here's a fellow firing an older P226, DA-SA. My X-5 is a P-226, but SA only.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/mt-42/mt-tb.cgi/12231

The last minute shows how quickly the pistol cycles. Lots of shots. My
mags hold 19 rounds, plus one in the pipe.

Oh...I've taken Sig's Close Quarter Operator's Course.





--
A wise Latina makes better decisions than a dumb elephant.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:11:59 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:08:54 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:36:30 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 23:53:47 -0700, jps penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 22:55:25 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:
|
|
|"jps" wrote in message
om...
| On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:36:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim
| wrote:
|
|just today. the victim was from St. Louis Mo.
|
|http://www.seattlepi.com/local/40830...ml?source=mypi
|
| Guess what? One of them has survived.
|
| Would that have happened with a gun? Nope.
|
| He thought he had killed them both.
|
| Bullets to the head would have made it for sure.
|
| Glad he had a knife instead. 100% improvement on mortality rate.
|
|Much more likely to die from a knife wound than a gun shot.
|
|Right. Cite please.

It is a debatable point with no clear answers.... and I think the
*real* answer lies in statistics garnered from countries where knives
are more prevalent than guns.

The fact that this study is flawed is found in the assertion "The
distribution of wounds is different for knife assaults and gun
assaults, since victims of knife assaults have more chance to dodge
and block," which is ridiculously untrue.

For those with proper training, inside of about 10 feet, I'll take the
knife and you can have the gun. I'll never lose and you'll never see
the knife.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1993...ives-00000.php

Oh for ****'s sake Gene, you're assuming whomever is weidling the
knife is an expert.

Flawed logic.

The guy in this case obviously meant to kill both women but left one
alive. Sound like a knife expert to you? Neither of the women were
armed from what I understand.

Any dweeb with two hands and an arse can put a bullet through
someone's skull at close range. What's the chance of survival?

And I suppose merely being in possession of a gun somehow imbues the
wielder with magical powers of perfect aim......

From 5 feet or 10 feet it's a hell of a lot easier to immobilize a
person with a gun than a knife unless you're a circus performer.

Point the thing in the general direction and pull the trigger 3 or 4
times, you're bound to hit something.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:54:42 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:25:11 -0400, H the K
wrote:

On 7/22/09 9:11 PM, Gene wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:08:54 -0700, wrote:
p

Oh for ****'s sake Gene, you're assuming whomever is weidling the
knife is an expert.

Flawed logic.

The guy in this case obviously meant to kill both women but left one
alive. Sound like a knife expert to you? Neither of the women were
armed from what I understand.

Any dweeb with two hands and an arse can put a bullet through
someone's skull at close range. What's the chance of survival?

And I suppose merely being in possession of a gun somehow imbues the
wielder with magical powers of perfect aim......

At 10 feet with a target the size of an adult human and some
considerable experience handling and shooting firearms?

You don't need perfect aim, just "decent" aim.

I suppose you haven't seen those police dash camera pictures where
trained police officers fire lots of ammo without hitting anyone.
What you can do on the range may not translate to what you can do in
bad light, when you are not really prepared and under more than a
little stress.

We're talking about knives vs. guns. In the same circumstances, the
knife is going to be just as difficult to handle as a deadly weapon as
a gun.

On Jul 22, 7:24*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:07:41 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:



On Jul 22, 11:09*am, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:12:43 -0400, H the K
wrote:

Yogi of Woodstock wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:36:30 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The fact that this study is flawed is found in the assertion "The
distribution of wounds is different for knife assaults and gun
assaults, since victims of knife assaults have more chance to dodge
and block," which is ridiculously untrue.

For those with proper training, inside of about 10 feet, I'll take the
knife and you can have the gun. I'll never lose and you'll never see
the knife.

Ahem - without getting into specifics, you are absoutely 100% correct.

B.S. Bravado.

From 10 feet away, if someone came after me with a knife in a fight and
I were holding my SIG X-5, he'd be on the ground dying from three taps
to the chest. Especially if the guy with the knife were an old fart. You
know, a guy your age or Gene's age.

Closer than 10 feet, you're assuming the guy with the pistola is
standing around and waiting for the perp and his knife to close in...

At one of my CCW classes the instructor demonstrated this. Nobody
could draw and fire an aimed shot before he got them, even from a
fannie pack, worn in front with your hand on the gun. The problem is
reaction time from the time you see the guy move until you start
moving. We are talking a fraction of a second here.
I suppose some of those cowboy action shooters can do this but they
train several hours a day *... and they know when it's coming.
I really do think he was trying to drum up business for his self
defense course since the answer was deflecting the knife, then
shooting the guy as demonstrated by his assistant.
My thought was if you are that good why do you need to shoot him? Just
take the knife away and stab him.

Behold Bob Munden:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0dYEjR-jA

That is one of those action shooters I was talking about.
If you started with his natural talent and *you shot 100,000 rounds a
year, you might be able to do that too.
I knew a natural skeet shooter when I was with the IBM Skeet League
who could do amazing things with a shotgun but I didn't confuse that
with the other 80 shooters there.

You mean like Tim Bradley?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYUn2jMQfuA