Fighting a maniac with a samurai sword

38SnubFan said:
Like the other guy said, I'm keeping pepper spray in the "condiments" category.

If I'm being attacked with lethal force, I'm responding with lethal force.
Click to expand...

38, I'm with you on this one but pepper spray is an intermediate step before using lethal force. If the guy is acting in a threatening manner but has not done anything to justify the use of lethal force, are you going to be the one to escalate the situation and draw a gun? It is possible that the other person may have a weapon but it hasn't gotten there yet. If the use of lethal force is avoidable, it should be done. You greatly lower your chances of being prosecuted and or sued civilally but the family of the person you shot.

Many times, the drawing of a weapon escalates the situation to where it is difficult to back down. If someone draws a weapon on you, you must respond by drawing your own weapon. By my reasoning, I don't know if he will shoot me so I had better shoot first to eliminate that possibility. This is why you should only draw when you have to use it. I know there are incidents where by displaying the weapon, the other prson backed down but that is optimistic. I believe that in the heat of the moment, merely drawing a gun may not be enough to stop a person. Will you shoot if the person antagonizes you and dares you to pull the trigger?

I will share from my experience. Living in Miami, we have more than our fair share of the homeless. When I was younger and even dumber than I am now, I carried a pellet gun in plain sight when I got into downtown. I had an agressive bum hounding me for money and I pointed to the pellet gun. He dared me to shoot him and asked what was I going to do with that. In retrospect, I should have just maced him and driven away. I had other cars in front of me so I couldn't just drive off. I wasn't justified to shoot, but the guy was pretty big and acting in a treatening manner.

I hope this changes your perspective as there are many situations in where less than lethal force should be attempted first. I do agree that if lethal force is being used, that you should respond in kind.
 
I think they should sue the manufacturer of the sword, make law abiding sword owners register them, and send that guy to anger management classes. I'd prob'ly sue the church as well! :D

Y'all know I'm kidding, right?
 
I believe that in the heat of the moment, merely drawing a gun may not be enough to stop a person.
Click to expand...
That's a reasonable thing to believe. Deputy Herzog probably believed that too, so he pulled out his LEO strength pepper spray - and according to eyewitnesses at the scene - sprayed it directly into the face of the animal who subsequently killed him with his (Deputy Herzog's) own gun. So not only didn't the pepper spray have any effect in stopping the killer, it didn't even slow him down or prevent the killer from grabbing the gun.

The long and short of it is that if someone is psycho enough to not back down after you pull a gun, then it just might be that he's psycho enough to kill you after you've spiced him up.

In any case if one finds oneself in a situation where one has to commit the equivalent of assault to stop an assailant, one might just as well use a reasonable weapon for that purpose. Pepper is for cooking, or perhaps the occasional crowd control application, that and lining the pockets of the folks who market it as a self-defense weapon. I sure hope they think of Deputy Herzog every time they make a sale. :mad:
 
Fred,

When I stated that merely drawing a gun may not stop someone, that doesn't necessarily mean they should go for the pepper spray. It may be shoot decision rather than a spray decision. That point was made to illustrate that people in a rage don't think clearly and some won't back down even when a gun is pulled. Does that give you a right to shoot an unarmed person? I seriously doubt it unless you are a petite female and the attacker is a huge bear of a man.

Many cops switched to pepper spray and away from mace due to the lack of vapors that also affected them, especially if it would go off in the car. Pepper spray has to make direct contact with the skin, eyes, or mucous menbranes to be effective. Was Deputy Herzog carrying a powerful brand of pepper spray or was it a weaker formula so he wouldn't have to baby sit a crying slobbering perp he sprayed.

Maybe you feel that we should really just shoot first and ask questions later. In that case, maybe you should be a Miami cop. Some people respect human life, even the lives of criminals.

Carry the best product available and use common sense as to whether lethal force is really necessary. In some cases it will be and will be the only thing to save your life. Maintain a respect for all life though and don't be so quick to escalate. Your life will be much less complicated.
 
Pepper spray has to make direct contact with the skin, eyes, or mucous menbranes to be effective.
Click to expand...
Would inside the mouth, up the nose, and into both eyes (no glasses on the perp) count? That's where Deputy Herzog hit his killer in the face. One of the (oddly enough armed with her personal CCW) eyewitnesses to the killing was an off-duty EMT. I'm pretty sure she knows anatomy well enough so that we can be sure her description is accurate. Sadly she was not able to get a clear shot at the killer.
Was Deputy Herzog carrying a powerful brand of pepper spray or was it a weaker formula so he wouldn't have to baby sit a crying slobbering perp he sprayed.
Click to expand...
Maybe you missed this part of what I said : "LEO strength pepper spray".
When I stated that merely drawing a gun may not stop someone, that doesn't necessarily mean they should go for the pepper spray.
Click to expand...
That's contradictory enough to cover all of your bases. And some say you can't have it both ways.
Carry the best product available and use common sense as to whether lethal force is really necessary. In some cases it will be and will be the only thing to save your life. Maintain a respect for all life though and don't be so quick to escalate. Your life will be much less complicated
Click to expand...
The lesson that Deputy Herzog's situation teaches (some of us) is that giving the benefit of the doubt to a murderer can get one killed. The fact of the matter is that I have not, and will not for that matter, escalate anything. I'm not drawing a weapon unless a threat exists. Once the threat exists it is going to be incumbent upon the person causing the threat to de-escalate the situation. I respect life plenty, I've even risked my life for others, but if someone threatens me and/or mine, or even an innocent stranger's life, their actions will determine whether they live or die. The vagaries of judgement of "people in a rage" notwithstanding.

In Deputy Herzog's case the threat was as plain as day. A very large muscular man standing in traffic raving and trying to drag screaming women from their cars as they entered the intersection. I'm not sure if Deputy Herzog shared your deep and abiding respect for the life of deviants, but sadly his own life is much less complicated. It's over.

Thanks for all of the advice just the same.
 
Last edited:
I would have to play this by ear. If someone comes into my church swinging a sword, I would have to sum up what exacly was happening. If the guy is obviously incompetent, and just swinging wildly, and has not killed anybody, then pepper spray has much to commend itself. If the guy is trained, and beheading a person a second, then it would be an obvious time for an immediate application of the strongest force available. Or, even if he is a pathetic mass-murderer, but has already killed or seriously injured a person, then I would shoot, out of anger as well as fear for the lives of others.
It sounds like this guy was incompetent. While four victims is always four too many, any person who can charge into a church and only murder one person is patheticly bad. But I would have shot him anyway. One less creep.
But it is like the martial arts saying, "Don't fear the belt. Fear the person wearing it". I would sum up the actual threat, as well as the potential threat.
 
Stephen,

I understand your points and even agree with them to point, but on this scenario, I have to stand firm, and say I would still go for the gun first. If he's crazy enough to charge me after he's staring at the business-end of a .45, then he's going to be stopped. Reason I wouldn't pull the spray first is because HE IS ARMED with a lethal weapon, and I don't have the time to try a NON-LETAL device first. Thus to quote from your most recent reply:

Does that give you a right to shoot an unarmed person?
Click to expand...
A man with a Samurai sword swinging it around violent is NOT EXACTLY what I'd refer to as unarmed.

Hope if nothing more, we can agree to disagree in our opinions of this situation. I think it's fair to say we can all have different viewpoints and not have a right or wrong; just "human" thought.

-38SnubFan
 
I agree with 38Snub fan, a samurai sword in the hands of a master kendo swordsman is probably more efficient than any handgun you care to name in a 3-5 foot range.

However even if this person is an amatuer, a real katana (folded steel made by a japanese master) is designed to cut through flesh and bone as if they were paper. And since most church goers do not wear chainmail armor, they would be in lethal danger just from an amatuer trying to cut them up.

I would think anyone armed whether it be a blade or sword is a lethally armed foe and should be treated as such. Lets not fool ourselves with this PC crap. Many men and women have been killed by these instruments of death way before guns were invented. Swords and knives are just as lethal in close range than a gun.

In fact if you look at casualty figures in the middle ages, they were much higher for the amount of people in the encounter, than modern engagements and casualty figures. A tribute to modern medicine, but also the lethality of the sword.
 
Duxman, quite astute observation about the rather appalling wound capabilities of swords. Even when used by people who may not be proficient in the finer points.
Mayhaps the reason the Polizei didn't shoot, related to the likely presence of others still in the building. So in this case, pepper spray some other forms of containment may have been appropriate. Admirable degree of training and restraint on their part.
Without a firearm, the potentially useable response to something of this nature, might be an improvised item which resembles a long staff. A good hand with a halfstaff was often able to contain a swordsman. Or even kill one... Best reponse, get thee hence from that place.
Weird thing is, with the effects of firearms restrictions, the cultural predispositions of some groups for edged weapons, and the effects of internet and video RPG's involving edged weapons... maybe there will be more of these kinds of incidents.
Hopefully not...
 
"obviously incompetent"

I would have to play this by ear. If someone comes into my church swinging a sword, I would have to sum up what exacly was happening. If the guy is obviously incompetent, and just swinging wildly, and has not killed anybody, then pepper spray has much to commend itself.
Click to expand...
I would not rely on my assumption that anybody with a lethal weapon was "obviously incompetent". I would behave exactly that way to get close enough to demonstrate my actual competence.

a samurai sword in the hands of a master kendo swordsman is probably more efficient than any handgun you care to name in a 3-5 foot range.
Click to expand...
I have 20 years of experience practicing with various martial arts. Believe me: A sword is a dead-simple weapon. You need no skill at all to use it well agains unarmed people. That's just because you can't stop a sword with your bare hands (and that's a Bruce Lee quote).

Indiana Jones has an effective tactic for this swordfight situation - significantly superior to pepper spray.
Click to expand...

I remember the scene :) . I was 13 or so when I first saw it. Made my think about my blid believe in unarmed or at least non-firepower skills. So I started shooting :cool:
 
Para Bellum
Believe me: A sword is a dead-simple weapon. You need no skill at all to use it well agains unarmed people. That's just because you can't stop a sword with your bare hands (and that's a Bruce Lee quote).
Click to expand...

Same goes for the machete and similar impliments.
 
^^^

Meh. A katana is far above/beyond a machete; you ought to be ashamed of yourself for comparing the two! (:p)

But yeah, I wonder what the psychological states were of the people going nuts with katanas; generally, if you're actually in martial arts, you've developed a lot of discipline by the time you make it to weapons. They've been at it for a couple thousand years, they've figured out that just training someone how to kill/maim without instilling a lot of discipline would result in people just flipping out and killing people.

If lobbies start popping up to ban swords, I'm going to be pissed.
 
I shoot quite often, but have never used a sword other than just picking one ou from time to time. That said, if I am within about 7 or 8 feet in a situation, I would rather have the sword. You can simply do far more damage in a short period of time with much less need for skill or luck. Shoot someone in the arm, and they will be hurting, but a good sword can simply take the whole arm off in much less time.
 
That said, if I am within about 7 or 8 feet in a situation, I would rather have the sword. You can simply do far more damage in a short period of time with much less need for skill or luck. Shoot someone in the arm, and they will be hurting, but a good sword can simply take the whole arm off in much less time.
Click to expand...
Even regarding what I said above, I disagree. I can put 16 Federal EMFJ-Bullets into an opponent who is already at body contact with my Glock 19. Once somebody is that close, a Katana is almost useless.
 
Para - an unskilled person would be better off with a firearm (as "untrained" peasants killed many highly trained samurai in the Meji Dynasty.)

But in close quarters against an iajitsu sword master, he can draw cut your throat and re-sheath the sword in under 1 second. All without breaking eye contact with you.

Good luck getting those slugs through his system in that time.

Of course the good news is, there are less than 2 dozen iajitsu masters running around in the world. :D
 
You guys are forgetting something important though. Swords are not very concealable. Unless you get ambushed or walk around a blind corner, it is hard to simply walk up to someone with a katana. Now the iajitsu sword masters may have the advantage since an undrawn sword isn't likely to be perceived as a threat. Now that I know however, I will shoot anyone I see with a sword if they are within 25 feet of me! :eek: :p :D . Now lets just hope they aren't experts at throwing swords as well.
 
Duxman

..do you happen to be Frank Dux?

Para - an unskilled person would be better off with a firearm (as "untrained" peasants killed many highly trained samurai in the Meji Dynasty.)
Click to expand...
yes. Magnificently displayed in Kagemusha.

But in close quarters against an iajitsu sword master, he can draw cut your throat and re-sheath the sword in under 1 second. All without breaking eye contact with you.
Click to expand...
Hard to believe. And impossible at bodycontact (as I posted above). If he is an inch before me or even closer, he can't even grab the handle of his sword (cross-draw) while I can grab my glock 19, twist it 90°, pull back and fire twice (also under one second, the other 14 shots come in the follwing seconds).
I would not advise anybody to fight a pistol with a sword. Even the best only have a chance to be faster if they are no closer than a meter (3ft) and not further away than 8 meters (25 ft). Thats the basics even of anti-baseball-bat-defense: close in, make body contact!
But that's just my opinion.

Good luck getting those slugs through his system in that time.
Click to expand...
Thank you ;) . As I said, he can't even reach the handle of his sword (with his leading sword-hand), if we are at body contact. The handles would be at my side and I could control his swords with my left and shoot him with my right. I bet a cent on myself :p

Of course the good news is, there are less than 2 dozen iajitsu masters running around in the world.
Click to expand...
:) and if they attempt fighting gunmen, there will be even less soon :D

That's what I call theroretical combat ;) .
stay safe and have a nice weekend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top