+- Survival UK Forums (http://forum.survivaluk.net)
+-- Forum: Discussion Area (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Forum: Security (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=39)
+--- Thread: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 (/showthread.php?tid=6573)
The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Tartar Horde - 23 February 2014
Many of us on this site keep a variety of bladed weapons for whatever reason. The link to the articles below gives a fascinating insight, with many historical first hand reports from Duels and post mortems on the actual damage a human body can take from a range of sharp weapons is illuminating and rather graphic. The human is a lot harder to kill with blades than most people realise.
http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/bloody.php
http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/kill2.php
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Timelord - 23 February 2014
That is why "Machetes" are a poor defence weapon. You will see this sometimes reported on TV from some destabilized African Country ethnic violence, where a victim in the street is cut maybe 40 times with a machete before finally expiring. A horrible way to go but it shows the inefficiency of the light cutting blade of the cheaper mass produced type of machete commonly available.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Tartar Horde - 24 February 2014
Machete's may be a poor defence weapon Timelord, but surprisingly I would recommend them for people with no training at all. Most people revert to the "hack away like a madman" when they have little training, and in this mode a Machete would be as good in their hands as anything to be honest. They can take a lot of abuse, and don't need to be looked after like our Carbon steel Swords.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - CharlesHarris - 24 February 2014
If firearms are not an option, a short-staffed pike or halbard about 1.5 metres long, with a spear blade, hammer and axe blades would be a formidable weapon in practiced hands. It would be suitable for keeping people beyond arm's length and could he used in thrust, jab, parry, slash and smash strokes, exactly as used with a rifle having a fixed bayonet.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Tartar Horde - 24 February 2014
Charles please, Staff and Halberd are peasants weapons, and one is a Swordsman
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - bigpaul - 24 February 2014
speak for yourself TH i'll "hack and slash " with the best, mind you a longbow will take out anyone before they get anywhere near-unless its an ambush of course.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Midnitemo - 24 February 2014
A quick death in battle of old was not as common as hollywood would have us believe...lots of post battle despatching had to be done...it begs the question , how you going to cope with finishing somebody off after you've fought them and prevailed.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Mortblanc - 24 February 2014
Unless the opponent was completely unarmed the one that "prevailed" will be more intent on seeking his own medical attention than dispatching anyone.
Even the winner of a knife fight goes to intensive care.
One of the reasons the British archers were so hated by the rest of Europe was not due to their skill with the longbow. It was because they would charge the battlefield to dispatch the grounded and wounded knights using their belt daggers. They even developed the roundel dagger for this use. The archers were seeking loot to take from the dead bodies and cared nothing for taking the enemy alive and holding them for ransom, which was the way gentlemen fought.
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Barneyboy - 24 February 2014
a nice BBQ
RE: The dubious quick kill pt1 & 2 - Tartar Horde - 25 February 2014
Slight correction Mortblanc, those archers were ENGLISH not British, although I know there were a few Welshmen in the companies they were predominantly English. Britain only came into being with the act of union joining Scotland and England.
When two opponents of similar skill, or no skill at all for that matter, come to blows with bladed weapons, the chances are very high that they will both end up needing medical care (if they live). The articles I gave links to prove that this is the case, it is also the case when you investigate Japanese accounts of Samurai encounters. A lot of the time both combatants would be killed within one or two sword strokes. This is because in those days most men would know how to use a sword, and so you had a population that was familiar with it's use. Today the reality is very different and virtually no one trains or uses these weapons in the general population, even though there are a few clubs around that do, the numbers viz the population are small. Anyone with training, and diligent practice will have a huge advantage against your average blade weilding citizen, who will try to hack, slash and batter you to death, using anger as a substitute for skill.