ForumsWEPRNon-gun weapons control

114 50346
SportShark
offline
SportShark
2,980 posts
Scribe

There are many forms of non-firearm lethal weapons: knives, blunt instruments, bows/crossbows, etc. Since all of these can be and are used to commit crimes such as murder and armed robbery, should they be made illegal? At what point/and or what should weapons such as tactical/killing knives should be made illegal? Are these specialized knives useful tools for self defense, or should they be made illegal by the government? Since these weapons are much easier to obtain than guns (many can be made fairly easily too), what steps would be needed to enforce more restrictive laws against these weapons.

Finally, I will state my position. I believe that like just with guns, these weapons in question are only as bad or as good as the person that is holding it. I own many different types of tactical knives for self defense: machetes, kerambits, hunting knives, butterfly knives, etc..
I have no desire to use them unless when necessary to save myself from death or severe personal injury from an attacker(s).

  • 114 Replies
apldeap123
offline
apldeap123
1,708 posts
Farmer

Alright, I will.

Darktroop07
offline
Darktroop07
3,592 posts
Shepherd

In other words, there are no "assault knives." It's an edgy title the media stamped onto the combat knife just to make them sound up to par with "assault rifles," since they encourage people to equate "assault" with "ban" when there is no technical definition for "assault weapon."

Glorify the tragic event with the media, and make everyone paranoid about weapons. Can you ever see a person with a gun and not think of worst case scenarios unless properly educated?
samiel
offline
samiel
421 posts
Shepherd

Ok I just sorta want to say that what depicts an "Assault Knife" Isn't a combat and although it sounds REALLY COOL and I kind of want one it seems rather inefective in a combat situation. Any one who frequently uses knives knows that a collapsable or folding blade would damage the structural integrity of the knife.Finger grooves are not that good either because then it's only more effective for someone with a hand that fits (Unlike me). Also the knife is a bayonet with a sheath that you can use with a shield. Ok I'm going to describe this one more time, a folding bayonet with a sheath that you can use with a shield. That's just dumb, plain dumb. Now on to the next thing, any item can be used as a weapon for any purpose. Weapon are only as dangerous as the hand that wields them. as far as banning or resticting them, why?. What danger does it pose to the populace when not in the hands of a dangerous person. Image someone attacks you with a switchblade while you have 25. handgun. Now imagine that person is green beret that attacks you from behind. Alternitive thought imagine it's an unstable 17 year old kid with asthma that can only benchpress 75 pounds who comes at you head on. Yah I think the second might not be as dangerous.

FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

Um... Matt. Your choice of article fails to cite any reference material or original research. The only mention of tangible data is from a strawman opinion poll whose existence we have only the author's word for. The article opens with a false analogy, which quickly turns into a false dichotomy:

guns -> gun violence , no guns -> knife violence | gun violence = knife violence

Probably in an effort to win over the centre-left, it is then escalated into anti-red propaganda:

government of China = communist = corrupt, evil, and/or tyrannical | any law enforced by same = inept, self-serving, and/or tyrannical

From here on, the author simply rants foolishly about what he assumes (or would like his readers to assume) is going on in the liberal camp.

It's a shame research results like this [the strawman opinion poll] won't make a difference, because liberal gun control efforts aren't based on science [which fails to make an appearance anywhere in this article], instead they are "faith-based," worshiping at the altar of big government and liberal policy.

The list that you quote from this article is as baseless as it is vague. At no point does he mention that all or any of these features even have been used to define the term, let alone who is using them.

Here are the deadly features liberals can use to define an "assault knife:"

To "assault" is simply to attack or threaten to attack, which would mean all weapons are assault weapons. The term appears to be a misnomer for "combat knife", which is a class of knife originally intended for use in a military combat scenario. The misnomer is not a liberal construct, nor in any way specific to liberals.

Blade has a depression running parallel to the edge, often called a "blood groove.

This is not a feature of any kitchen or utility knife I have ever seen. They do appear on combat knives, "survival knives", some bayonets, and some hunting knives.

Knife has the ability to fold like a folding stock

This is just used by lawmakers to describe switchblades. It has no direct relation to knives designed for killing people, so it shouldn't even be here.

Knife may be attached to a rifle like a bayonet

That would be a bayonet, which is only useful in warfare (and possibly for hunting tigers, but that isn't exactly a common occurence in the U.S.).

Knife handle has indentations for fingers like a pistol grip

Many knives at least have something sort of like this, but the description is simply too vague to be certain of what the author means.

Knife has a guard to protect the hand

This would relate to combat knives and swords, which are used primarily for the same purpose.

Knife may be used in conjunction with a shield

Swords again, but the correlation is tentative at best. No law pertaining specifically to one thing should specify it as possibly being used in conjunction with some unrelated thing.

Knife has a scabbard that may be attached to a belt

A common feature among swords, combat knives, and survival knives.

As you can see, most of the features he lists are related to combat knives, swords, and survival knives which are virtually the same as combat knives.

The writer was stapling a bunch of potential qualifications to the knife to show how ridiculous said qualifications would be, and they don't all apply to one knife.

And if one were to pass a law specific to Cadillacs, you would see a similar list of potential qualifications. Not every Cadillac has fins, a hardtop, gull wing bumpers, bullet-shaped bumper guards and tail lights, and an external rear-view mirror. Should we conclude that the Cadillac, in fact, does not exist?

FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

Unless you can find a legitimate source defining that term, my argument is that the media added "assault" to the weapon to, most likely, make it sound scary and evil, like the term assault rifle, which I already stated has no official definition either.


Because ground warfare is nicer than being attacked or threatened? The media is completely justified in calling something an assault knife if it is marketed under that name, just as they would be in referring to a car by its brand and series name.

I should also point out that your "no official definition" claim is falsely attributed, as the article cited has no mention of any such thing.
09philj
offline
09philj
2,825 posts
Jester

For the sixth time, there is no such thing as an assault knife.


What's this then?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Knife_vishnya_nr43_ussr.jpg
Just because combat knives can't be classified by design they can be classified by intended use. If the knife was built primarily for hurting people, and not, say, chopping carrots, it's a combat knife.
09philj
offline
09philj
2,825 posts
Jester

If the victim was killed by a combat knife, why didn't the article say so? Why use "assault" instead, when such a category doesn't exist?

I've already explained why, so I won't bother repeating myself, since that doesn't seem to work.


Because the word "assault" would describe a combat knife designed for stabbing or slashing rather than throwing.
FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

For the sixth time, there is no such thing as an assault knife. The media is not justified in their use of such a term because it is not marketed under that name.


Straying no further than the first page of google search "assault knife", I found:
1 Ontario 9414BM RAK
2 Gil Hibben Assault Tactical Knife
3 SOA Titanium Assault Knife - UC2804

Therefore, I must disagree with your conclusion.

What's this then?


That's a military issue combat knife.

If the victim was killed by a combat knife, why didn't the article say so?


Because the article was quoting Senator Feinstein, who used the term "assault knife", when she clearly meant combat knife. That's the only appearance of the term in the article sited by apldeap123.
FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

In other words, you have provided two fixed-blade knives and one tactical knife. None are "assault knives."


All of them are called "assault knives". They are marketed as "assault knives". They are not described as "assault knives", because that (like Cadillac Eldorado, to reuse the car analogy) isn't a descriptive term.

The site is siding with the NRA, so the quote: "we are tempted to say 'shootings,' but half the victims were stabbed to death, undoubtedly with an assault knife" is sarcastic.


It isn't sarcasm, as that would be useless in this context. If it were being called a shooting, the focus would be on the guns. Any other weapon involved can only help to divert negative attention from them. That's why the author considers it noteworthy.

Admit it: there is no such weapon.


Do you concede that there is no such thing as a Cadillac Eldorado?
samiel
offline
samiel
421 posts
Shepherd

OK look someone posted the description of a an "Assault knife" And based off of the things on that list only and Idiot would use something like that. Moving on from that a combat knife is a knife suited for combat.If I create were create a weapon then that weapon would be whatever that weapon is. If you call a M40a1 a Long Ragney Murdelator (That's what I assume the name of a bandit sniper from borderlands would be if they made one.) and described it like this
A thingy with a trigger
A thingy that fires other thingys that hurt
A thingy with a barrel
A thingy that fires up to a certain distance, which I'm to lazy to specify.
A thingy that could have a scope thingy put on it.
That M40a1 is still an M40a1 just because someone created a fake label on it does not the fact that it is an M40a1, Just like tacking on "assault" to any thing automaticly makes it dangerous it also muddles the description of everything. And it's a little of topic but I think the media just likes to make up terms at this point.

09philj
offline
09philj
2,825 posts
Jester

If it's a knife built for assaulting with, it's an assault knife.

samiel
offline
samiel
421 posts
Shepherd

Sorry for double posting but let me clarify one thing.
@MattemAngel Fish is saying that they are genuinly marketed as "assault knives" by the people that selling them. He just has very little communication skill on these forums and I think he kind of enjoys frustrating people so he doesn't attend to them.
@Fishprefered I think my previos statement is clear enough.

09philj
offline
09philj
2,825 posts
Jester

It's not a category. It's an adjective for describing how the knife would be used. A combat knife could be described as an assault knife because that's what it's for.

FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

In the case of your examples, only the word "Assault" is part of the name.


The Ontario 9414BM RAK Ranger Assault Knife clearly contains the term "Assault Knife" in its name. Twice, in fact, because the acronym is a redundancy. The other two are more implicit: What are they trying to convey by naming a knife the "___ Assault"?

A Gil Hibben Assault is not an assault knife any more that a Cadillac Eldorado is an eldorado luxury car.


The name Eldorado actually pertains to an entire class of luxury cars from different series made over the years. You can, in fact, categorize a Series 62 Eldorado Biarritz as an Eldorado, just as you can categorize an Ontario 9414BM RAK as a Ranger Assault Knife; it's just redundant.
samiel
offline
samiel
421 posts
Shepherd

Assault=Verb not adjective. This is English. It is the language we are now speaking. In this language the word assault is a verb. A verb describes an action. An action is something you do. An adjective describes something. I am assaulting someone. Am I making them well suited for a combat situation? It's clear to me that you are now trying to justify a pointless point by trying to change our language. @09Philj
Also now your starting to make sense @FishPrefered.

Showing 91-105 of 114