How much of an advantage is a knife?

[Joab]

W.E. "Dangerous Dan" Fairbairn, who was the police chief of Shanghai during the 1930's and came out on top of over 600 documented fights while arresting various thugs and trainer of the British Commandoes during World War II and the author of the classic "Get Tough!" wrote the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarter combat. John Perkins, a former New York City Police officer with lots of experience with close quarter combat, and founder of the "Attack Proof" self defense system stated, "anyone with a knife immediately becomes a 12th degree blackbelt".

With all due respect to Fairbairn who knows more about this subject than I ever will, it seems to me a gun is more dangerous, as all you have to do is pull a trigger. And with respect to Perkins, while I agree a knife gives you a tremendous advantage over an unarmed opponent, this is a bit of hyerbole, I can't imagine some punk with a knife who doesn't really know what he's doing is more capable to defeat an expert in hand to hand combat who is unarmed. Still, the punk would only have to get lucky once.

What do you think? All opinions appreciated.

[Andrew Green]

Range matters a lot, with a little distance I would agree, but as soon as that distance disappears a knife is a very dangerous weapon.

Give it a try, put on some gloves and give one person a fake knife, even with a substantial gap in skill levels the guy with the knife is still very likely to do a lot of damage.

[tshadowchaser]

face a knife at close range and the advantage goes to the knife in most cases.
A pistol is dangerous at long range but a knife even in the hands of a fool is dangerous at hand to hand range

[morph4me]

A gun in dangerous if the person using it can hit what he aims at and your standing in front of him, but the bullet only comes from one direction. At close range a knife can come at you from different directions, and you don't have to be terribly accurate to do damage, and you may never know it until you've been cut a couple of times, and it doesn't require a great amount of training, just a willingness to get someone else's blood on you.

[MA-Caver]

Seems to some folks it's not that dangerous if you grab the blade. :rolleyes:

[diamondbar1971]

any attacker who has a razor knife in hand, is a potentially very dangerous individual, and should not be taken lightly and should be dealt with quickly and effectively.

[shesulsa]

W.E. "Dangerous Dan" Fairbairn, who was the police chief of Shanghai during the 1930's and came out on top of over 600 documented fights while arresting various thugs and trainer of the British Commandoes during World War II and the author of the classic "Get Tough!" wrote the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarter combat. John Perkins, a former New York City Police officer with lots of experience with close quarter combat, and founder of the "Attack Proof" self defense system stated, "anyone with a knife immediately becomes a 12th degree blackbelt".

With all due respect to Fairbairn who knows more about this subject than I ever will, it seems to me a gun is more dangerous, as all you have to do is pull a trigger. And with respect to Perkins, while I agree a knife gives you a tremendous advantage over an unarmed opponent, this is a bit of hyerbole, I can't imagine some punk with a knife who doesn't really know what he's doing is more capable to defeat an expert in hand to hand combat who is unarmed. Still, the punk would only have to get lucky once.

What do you think? All opinions appreciated.

Great replies thus far.

Someone here posted some fotos of knife wounds and they are NOT for those with weak constitutions.

A knife is better than nothing, but here's the deal: If you're not willing to do extensive damage with the knife, get bloody, witness the gore you cause with your blade and accept that you very well may kill someone with the right kinds of cuts, then you should *never* *ever* carry a knife. It is a very personal kind of combat, the results of which you may carry with you forever.

A weapon - any weapon - in the hand gives great advantage at potentially great cost.

Never underestimate it.

[arnisador]

Range is the key. At close range a knife can be accessed and deployed very quickly. A stab can easily be lethal. It's a much deadlier weapon than many people realize. Even if you "block" it you're apt to get cut...now you're fighting at, what, 90% While bleeding, in pain, and fearful? Maybe going into shock? Sure I'd take a gun in most situations, but don't underestimate the knife. Train with a knife expert and see how your defenses work! Use a chalked training knife. It's an eye-opener.

[elder999]

Sgt. Dennis Tueller, a Salt Lake City Police officer and defensive tactics trainer, developed what is called the "21 ft. rule," throguh a pretty extensive study which basically shows that a person can travel about that far in 1.5 seconds, and that if an officer has his sidearm holstered and is attacked by a person with a knife within that range, he can't deploy his weapon fast enough to respond reliably.

That basically means that within that range, the guy with the gun in his holster gets stabbed (the moist likely attack by an untrained knife wielder), maybe repeatedly.

Never mind what someone trained with a knife can do....


A knife is better than nothing, but here's the deal: If you're not willing to do extensive damage with the knife, get bloody, witness the gore you cause with your blade and accept that you very well may kill someone with the right kinds of cuts, then you should *never* *ever* carry a knife. It is a very personal kind of combat, the results of which you may carry with you forever..

Stabbed someone with a pen once, and wound up with a face and mouth full of their blood and getting to watch them die. Wayyyy better than getting killed, but not a pleasant experinece, either.

That said, people often can go on fighting for a while with a knife wound, depending on where it is, and survivors of knife attacks often report thinking they were simply punched, not stabbed....

[Joab]

I would never underestimate somebody with a knife, but I'm not so sure that it is the most dangerous close quarter weapon and I'm not sure even somebody who is reallt bad with a knife automatically becomes a 12th degree blackbelt. I would rather go against someone with a knife than someone with a gun, even at a close quarter range.

[elder999]

I would never underestimate somebody with a knife, but I'm not so sure that it is the most dangerous close quarter weapon and I'm not sure even somebody who is reallt bad with a knife automatically becomes a 12th degree blackbelt. I would rather go against someone with a knife than someone with a gun, even at a close quarter range.

Well, yeah-being threatened with a knife does offer the defender one glaring advantage over being threatened with a gun.....

...you can run. (I'd rather not face either, thanks....)

[Rich Parsons]

From my personal experience:

I have been able to close some distance, pull a weapon before they could clear their firearm.

I have also had a firearm pointed at me from 3 feet away, and there was nothing I could do. (* Actually in the Hostage thread I explained what I did do, but it was not attack *)

I have been cut on the arm and had a shallow stab in the leg along with many other knife encounters that either did not close or I was able to address the issue as I either had mroe luck or more training and determination.


In a close quarter hand to hand conflict, a knife elevates the damage potention infinitely. A gun does as well, but it is directional as mentioned above in this thread.


To test you skills get a cheap squirt gun, by doing this if it breaks you are out little. I recommend getting a few. Fill them up and execute your techniques.

If you get wet then you would have been shot. The reaction of the pressure of water is slower in travel speed then the slowest ammo from a firearm.

The use a marker (* water soluable *) or a small piece of chalk and use this as your knife. Engage, and see where the color marks are. Having multiple colors gives you multiple attempts to try to see if you are getting any better or if a technique works better for you than antoher.



But, from stories I have been told and personal experience, with a gun people will not engage and just give them their money. With a knife either they do not see it or think they can take it away or control it. The issue is that the most untrained and the extreme trained are the worst opponents to face as they will come at you and you just will not see it until it is too late.

[MA-Caver]

Tried doing a search but wasn't able to find it... far too many topics on the subject... a little while back there were a group of videos that showed the gun draw against a knife attacker... at varying distances. Seems the knife won out every time. Even at a distance of 25+ feet away.
Agree with Shesulsa do not ever-ever underestimate the knife wielder. And as Arnisador said you're fighting at less than full capacity when you do get cut. And I'll go to add that the percentage gets less with each cut you sustain... it doesn't take much. Shock, blood loss, severed nerves, ligaments, tendons all of that reduces your ability. AVOID getting cut and I'll re-state again as I have on another thread, grabbing the blade is not-a-bright-idea. The hand, the wrist, arm that is holding the blade yes but not the metal itself. Unless you want "your wife to be opening up your ketchup bottles for the rest of your life".

[searcher]

The advantage the knife gives that even if you are able to re-direct it, you will likely get cut. The gun has to be pointed at you to inflict its damage. And the fact that the knife never needs to be reloaded and it never runs out of ammo.

[David Weatherly]

Most knife attacks are pretty brutal. The attacker is not likely to cut or thrust once and then stop. As someone suggested, using a chalk knife and trying to defend against it without getting cut is a very eye opening experience.
An attacker really doesn't need any technique to do a lot of damage with a knife.
I realize the same could be said for a gun but the bullet can only come from one direction unlike a knife attack.

David

[jks9199]

Neither a gun nor knife is "more dangerous." Neither makes you more or less dead if successfully employed against you.

Arguing over the issue is like arguing which is better: peanut butter or chocolate. They're both good alone -- but great together.

[Joab]

Thanks to everyone for their replys. It would be interesting indeed to try to defend against a knife with a marker and see how I do as compared to a water gun. Of course the water would not be moving as fast as a bullet.

I would suggest its' not really a good idea to try to grab a wrist to defend yourself against a knife, there is a good chance you won't even see the wrist before the blade is sticking out of you. I would say the best defense against a knife wielder is to run, shoot him with a shot gun if you have one, handgun if not, pick up a chair and throw it at him, or anything else you can get your hands on and run! and keep on running. Jumping to the side and kicking him in the knee is suggested by one former teacher.

Personally, I would rather go against a knife wielder than a gun wielder. If someone pulls a gun on you within the distance that it is possible to redirect the gun he is stupid. There is no defense against a gun wielder who is to far away unless he freezes or the gun jams or he is out of ammo or you have a gun or something.

Again, thanks for all the sound, reasonable comments, I like this discussion forum a lot.

[sgtmac_46]

W.E. "Dangerous Dan" Fairbairn, who was the police chief of Shanghai during the 1930's and came out on top of over 600 documented fights while arresting various thugs and trainer of the British Commandoes during World War II and the author of the classic "Get Tough!" wrote the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarter combat. John Perkins, a former New York City Police officer with lots of experience with close quarter combat, and founder of the "Attack Proof" self defense system stated, "anyone with a knife immediately becomes a 12th degree blackbelt".

With all due respect to Fairbairn who knows more about this subject than I ever will, it seems to me a gun is more dangerous, as all you have to do is pull a trigger. And with respect to Perkins, while I agree a knife gives you a tremendous advantage over an unarmed opponent, this is a bit of hyerbole, I can't imagine some punk with a knife who doesn't really know what he's doing is more capable to defeat an expert in hand to hand combat who is unarmed. Still, the punk would only have to get lucky once.

What do you think? All opinions appreciated. Watch a few prison stabbings and get back with me on the kung fu expert dealing with some mere 'untrained punk with a knife'. The 'sewing machine' is very effecting in poking holes in your internal organs. ;)

As to the knife versus gun, it depends on range. At touching distance a large knife is capable of doing more damage in less time than a handgun. Handguns don't easily severe limbs and cut open your belly so your intestines drop out. The advantage of the gun is in range, and that advantage reduces the closer one gets.

[sgtmac_46]

Thanks to everyone for their replys. It would be interesting indeed to try to defend against a knife with a marker and see how I do as compared to a water gun. Of course the water would not be moving as fast as a bullet.

I would suggest its' not really a good idea to try to grab a wrist to defend yourself against a knife, there is a good chance you won't even see the wrist before the blade is sticking out of you. I would say the best defense against a knife wielder is to run, shoot him with a shot gun if you have one, handgun if not, pick up a chair and throw it at him, or anything else you can get your hands on and run! and keep on running. Jumping to the side and kicking him in the knee is suggested by one former teacher.

Personally, I would rather go against a knife wielder than a gun wielder. If someone pulls a gun on you within the distance that it is possible to redirect the gun he is stupid. There is no defense against a gun wielder who is to far away unless he freezes or the gun jams or he is out of ammo or you have a gun or something.

Again, thanks for all the sound, reasonable comments, I like this discussion forum a lot.

If you want realistic knife training, get a group of buddies and have one of them with a knife (you don't know which one) attack you when you aren't paying attention. Most knife attacks i've seen in the street involved the victim not even knowing there was a knife involved until they got stabbed a few times.

The reality of the knife isn't a squared off duel as most folks in the dojo train it....it is undetected movement for total surprise on the enemy. Awareness and controlling proxemics is your best defense, then followed by dealing with the attack.

Letting the attacker get within arms reach before you know he's making his run means you've already failed spectacularly and are now going to bleed for it!

The knife is and always has been a weapon of ambush. Undetected movement for total surprise on the enemy. You have to be able to be a good reader of intent, and deal with encroachment in some situations with suitable pre-emptive violence to avoid being stabbed. Pre-emptive violence means you have recognized the threat, and strike FIRST before he is set to move.

[MA-Caver]

If you want realistic knife training, get a group of buddies and have one of them with a knife (you don't know which one) attack you when you aren't paying attention. Most knife attacks i've seen in the street involved the victim not even knowing there was a knife involved until they got stabbed a few times.

The reality of the knife isn't a squared off duel as most folks in the dojo train it....it is undetected movement for total surprise on the enemy. Awareness and controlling proxemics is your best defense, then followed by dealing with the attack.

Letting the attacker get within arms reach before you know he's making his run means you've already failed spectacularly and are now going to bleed for it!

The knife is and always has been a weapon of ambush. Undetected movement for total surprise on the enemy. You have to be able to be a good reader of intent, and deal with encroachment in some situations with suitable pre-emptive violence to avoid being stabbed. Pre-emptive violence means you have recognized the threat, and strike FIRST before he is set to move.
Excellent training suggestion having an unknown holding the knife... but even more so... having several attacks but some with a knife and some without, at random... helps up the ante and reinforces the adage of expecting the unexpected.

[sgtmac_46]

Excellent training suggestion having an unknown holding the knife... but even more so... having several attacks but some with a knife and some without, at random... helps up the ante and reinforces the adage of expecting the unexpected. I suspect the result for most folks will be the adoption of some techniques that apply a little more universally, and the dropping of some techniques that only work for one or the other.

[GBlues]

Go check this video out. It's by Paul Vunak I got it off of youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk-EVLyIpts

I think it really kind of puts knife fighting into a good context right off the bat. Now I have to say this. I don't care if a man can clear 20ft. in 1.5 secs, against a good quick draw he's dead. I mean hell, I can draw my .45 and fire in .5 a second. So that still, leaves roughly .89 depending on the length of the mans arms and the knife, to still aim and fire. And there are guys out there that can do it in .2 of a second. That's really fast! So knife vs. gun, again depends on training levels of the two individuals.

So if I had to choose one. I would choose a knife, the two times I've been involved with a knife, I was very lucky and walked away in one piece. Plus I can run if it's necassary. A gun, I might still be able to run, but he might be a very good shot, so.....I might not get very far. Hehe! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[MJS]

W.E. "Dangerous Dan" Fairbairn, who was the police chief of Shanghai during the 1930's and came out on top of over 600 documented fights while arresting various thugs and trainer of the British Commandoes during World War II and the author of the classic "Get Tough!" wrote the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarter combat. John Perkins, a former New York City Police officer with lots of experience with close quarter combat, and founder of the "Attack Proof" self defense system stated, "anyone with a knife immediately becomes a 12th degree blackbelt".

With all due respect to Fairbairn who knows more about this subject than I ever will, it seems to me a gun is more dangerous, as all you have to do is pull a trigger. And with respect to Perkins, while I agree a knife gives you a tremendous advantage over an unarmed opponent, this is a bit of hyerbole, I can't imagine some punk with a knife who doesn't really know what he's doing is more capable to defeat an expert in hand to hand combat who is unarmed. Still, the punk would only have to get lucky once.

What do you think? All opinions appreciated.

I take it you never saw the video, "Surviving Edged Weapons" before, because if you had, you would certainly see the knife in a new light. :) Keep in mind, while both are dangerous weapons, and range will play a part depending on what is being used, the gun is only going to hurt the person when its pointed at them. The knife can be held in a number of positions and still be very effective.

As for the hand to hand expert coming out on top...while we hope that the arts give us an advantage, they do not turn us into invincible supermen. If the 'expert' does not train in a realistic fashion, all that training is going to go right out the window.

[MJS]

Tried doing a search but wasn't able to find it... far too many topics on the subject... a little while back there were a group of videos that showed the gun draw against a knife attacker... at varying distances. Seems the knife won out every time. Even at a distance of 25+ feet away.
Agree with Shesulsa do not ever-ever underestimate the knife wielder. And as Arnisador said you're fighting at less than full capacity when you do get cut. And I'll go to add that the percentage gets less with each cut you sustain... it doesn't take much. Shock, blood loss, severed nerves, ligaments, tendons all of that reduces your ability. AVOID getting cut and I'll re-state again as I have on another thread, grabbing the blade is not-a-bright-idea. The hand, the wrist, arm that is holding the blade yes but not the metal itself. Unless you want "your wife to be opening up your ketchup bottles for the rest of your life".

I believe this is what you are talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

[GBlues]

And here is a video from youtube about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qfX_Aj4fg

Pretty interesting. Never seen that before. I'll have to try that sometime. With a squirt gun.http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[seasoned]

Sgt. Dennis Tueller, a Salt Lake City Police officer and defensive tactics trainer, developed what is called the "21 ft. rule," throguh a pretty extensive study which basically shows that a person can travel about that far in 1.5 seconds, and that if an officer has his sidearm holstered and is attacked by a person with a knife within that range, he can't deploy his weapon fast enough to respond reliably.

That basically means that within that range, the guy with the gun in his holster gets stabbed (the moist likely attack by an untrained knife wielder), maybe repeatedly.

Never mind what someone trained with a knife can do....


Stabbed someone with a pen once, and wound up with a face and mouth full of their blood and getting to watch them die. Wayyyy better than getting killed, but not a pleasant experinece, either.

That said, people often can go on fighting for a while with a knife wound, depending on where it is, and survivors of knife attacks often report thinking they were simply punched, not stabbed....


I believe it is clear the holster, fire 2 rounds center mass and side step. During any given test only about 2 out of a 100 officers could complete the drill fully. I could be wrong on the drill but it goes something like this. Knives are very dangerous, close or at a distance. People have been known to take rounds and continue to move forward. I believe this is why 2 rounds then side step.

[jks9199]

If you want realistic knife training, get a group of buddies and have one of them with a knife (you don't know which one) attack you when you aren't paying attention. Most knife attacks i've seen in the street involved the victim not even knowing there was a knife involved until they got stabbed a few times.

The reality of the knife isn't a squared off duel as most folks in the dojo train it....it is undetected movement for total surprise on the enemy. Awareness and controlling proxemics is your best defense, then followed by dealing with the attack.


In fact, in several stabbings/knife assaults that I've investigated, the victims didn't know they'd been cut at first. Most thought they'd been punched until they discovered they were bleeding.

[arnisador]

I don't care if a man can clear 20ft. in 1.5 secs, against a good quick draw he's dead.

Very often in those scenarios what happens is that both parties take serious damage...one from bullets, one from a knife. Just because you can put a bullet in him before he is all the way there doesn't mean he won't take you with him, and the 21' rule has that factored into it.

[geezer]

In fact, in several stabbings/knife assaults that I've investigated, the victims didn't know they'd been cut at first. Most thought they'd been punched until they discovered they were bleeding.

Kinds of reminds me of a little impromptu demo my FMA instructor, Martin gave us last week. He saw his friend, the school's BJJ instructor, walk out of the office and called out, "Hey Tai, show these guys how quick you can get me onto the mat and make me submit". The BJJ guy obliged, taking down my instructor and applying a submission hold in a flash. My instructor immediately tapped out and then asked the BJJ guy, "Hey did you feel something working against your chest? Take a look!" Tai, the BJJ pro, leaned back and saw that Martin, the FMA guy, had pulled out his folding metal training knife and had totally worked over his chest and gut. "Damn! I NEVER even saw that!!!" Lesson learned. Tai is an awesome fighter, but he would have been cut to ribbons before he was aware that the other guy even had a knife. Scarey!

[MJS]

Now I have to say this. I don't care if a man can clear 20ft. in 1.5 secs, against a good quick draw he's dead. I mean hell, I can draw my .45 and fire in .5 a second. So that still, leaves roughly .89 depending on the length of the mans arms and the knife, to still aim and fire. And there are guys out there that can do it in .2 of a second. That's really fast! So knife vs. gun, again depends on training levels of the two individuals.



Very often in those scenarios what happens is that both parties take serious damage...one from bullets, one from a knife. Just because you can put a bullet in him before he is all the way there doesn't mean he won't take you with him, and the 21' rule has that factored into it.

Arni made a great point. Assuming that the person will go down after one shot is no different than assuming that someone will go down after one punch. Additionally, we are also assuming that the person with the gun will be a quickdraw. I doubt that the average person who gets a pistol permit, will actually do anymore training than whats required. In other words, I doubt that many will actually go out and train, a) in low light conditions, b) against a moving target, c) under streesful conditions.

Now, this isn't to say that people won't do that. I'm sure there're folks out there who take a combat handgun course or something of that nature, perhaps even LEOs, who will train in the above conditions. But I doubt that the guy who talks his wife into getting a gun for protection, will actually go that extra step.

A knife is, IMO, also quicker to deploy. Most blades today, have a clip, so pulling from the pocket should be fairly simple. Now, I'm sure there're states that allow open carry, but where I live, the only people I see with an open carry are LEOs. So, the woman who has it in her purse, the guy who has it under a winter coat....sorry, if I was going to bet money, I'd bet money that the guy with the blade would pull it faster than the one with the gun.

[Tez3]

Fairburn was Royal Marine before he was a police officer, his knife training and ideas for it would have been very much used for the archtypal commando raid etc. His training ideas would also have been of the time when knives were far easier to get hold of. The police were the better armed.
The OP did say in CQ combat where they are far easier to conceal and then use than a gun. It's not talking about covering 20ft, it's talking up close and personal. Then it seems logical that a knife is more dangerous than a gun.

[Joab]

Good comments from everyone. I suppose it depends upon what it means by close quarters, in other words how close, and if the gun is drawn and if the gun man has every intention to pull the trigger the moment you resist. I do believe it is obvious that a drawn gun outside the reach of someone is obviously more dangerous than a knife, than again that might not be considered close quarter. If the gunman has a gun to your back with every intention to pull the trigger the moment you make your move, obviously the gun would be more dangerous. But if he is in the process of drawing a gun within arms length, than I can agree that the knife might indeed be more dangerous, and I see your point. I would prefer to go against a guy with a knife rather than a gun in most situations, and it should be kept in mind that it is likely guns were not the primary weapon Fairbairn dealt with as a police officer, knives were far more common in Shanghai back than. But good comments all, and without a doubt a knife does give someone a tremendous advantage, I just believe that some guy who doesn't know what he's doing with a knife automatically becomes a 12th degree black belt is hyperbole, with all due respect to John Perkins.

[geezer]

....sorry, if I was going to bet money, I'd bet money that the guy with the blade would pull it faster than the one with the gun.

I don't know. You might get the knife out faster, but would the average, untrained and non-violent person really be able to deploy it effectively? Knife work can be pretty messy stuff. I 'd bet that, with a minimum of training, most (non-martial artist) folks would probably be better off defending themselves with a gun... if by using the deterrent factor alone. Now if someone is skilled with a knife and willing to use it if necessary (like my FMA instructor)--heaven help the thug that confronts him!!!

[Joab]

especially in the USA. In the USA the knife is seen as the weapon of the bad guy, and the typical juror will likely see you as someone looking for trouble by merely being in possession of a knife. In other areas of the world, especially Asia, this is not the case. The point of my thread is not in any way advocating using a knife for self defense, rather is it the most dangerous weapon in close quarters combat? I still think a gun is more dangerous in most situations, many on this thread disagree with me and believe a knife is more dangerous. W.E. Fairbairn believed the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarters combat and I have nothing but respect for his views and he was certainly more experienced and advanced than me by a thousand fold at least! Still, I think the gun is more dangerous, any idiot can pull a trigger and kill you, a knife is more difficult to use. A gun can be fired beyond the reach of an arm and a leg a knife can't be. At that range it might not be considered close quarters combat. But I would rather go against a knife wielder than a gunman any day.

[MJS]

I don't know. You might get the knife out faster, but would the average, untrained and non-violent person really be able to deploy it effectively? Knife work can be pretty messy stuff. I 'd bet that, with a minimum of training, most (non-martial artist) folks would probably be better off defending themselves with a gun... if by using the deterrent factor alone. Now if someone is skilled with a knife and willing to use it if necessary (like my FMA instructor)--heaven help the thug that confronts him!!!

Good point. I was going along the lines of while the knife is concealed, to a point, it'd still be easier, and of course, thinking with the FMA mindset. :) On the flip side, I suppose your analogy would apply to any weapon...gun, knife, pepper spray, etc. The was a thread on here, somewhere, talking about that very thing. The focus was, ok, you carry a weapon, but can you deploy and use it effectively especially when you're under pressure.

[MJS]

especially in the USA. In the USA the knife is seen as the weapon of the bad guy, and the typical juror will likely see you as someone looking for trouble by merely being in possession of a knife.

I suppose this brings up the question of...why carry anything at all then? Force of habit...someone who has a job that requires the use of a sharp instrument to cut something...they may carry a blade with them even when they're not working. A swiss army knife that has 1001 uses, ie: small scissors, screwdriver, etc.

On the other end of the coin, why would someone feel the need to carry a gun with them everywhere they go? Do they frequent bad areas? Do they have a job that requires them to carry?

Of course, whatever is carried, I would say that the person carrying and using had better have a good reason for pulling the weapon to begin with. Someone being verbally abusive to you in a roadrage incident, where nothing more than words is exchanged, is no reason to pull any weapon.


In other areas of the world, especially Asia, this is not the case. The point of my thread is not in any way advocating using a knife for self defense, rather is it the most dangerous weapon in close quarters combat? I still think a gun is more dangerous in most situations, many on this thread disagree with me and believe a knife is more dangerous. W.E. Fairbairn believed the knife is the most dangerous weapon in close quarters combat and I have nothing but respect for his views and he was certainly more experienced and advanced than me by a thousand fold at least! Still, I think the gun is more dangerous, any idiot can pull a trigger and kill you, a knife is more difficult to use. A gun can be fired beyond the reach of an arm and a leg a knife can't be. At that range it might not be considered close quarters combat. But I would rather go against a knife wielder than a gunman any day.

Is the knife that difficult to use though? IMO, it doesn't take that much thought, even for an untrained person, to be somewhat effective. Like it was said, the blade can be held a number of ways and its going to cut you. The gun is only going to hurt you when its pointed. Then again, I'm sure the average gangbanger didn't go thru the local NRA handgun safety course. LOL!

Both are deadly weapons and both have their pros and cons. I'm not against anyone carrying either one. I do think though, that if you're going to go thru the trouble of carrying, why not put in some effort to make sure you're as effective as possible? :)

[sgtmac_46]

I take it you never saw the video, "Surviving Edged Weapons" before, because if you had, you would certainly see the knife in a new light. :) Keep in mind, while both are dangerous weapons, and range will play a part depending on what is being used, the gun is only going to hurt the person when its pointed at them. The knife can be held in a number of positions and still be very effective.

As for the hand to hand expert coming out on top...while we hope that the arts give us an advantage, they do not turn us into invincible supermen. If the 'expert' does not train in a realistic fashion, all that training is going to go right out the window. Surviving Edged Weapons has been an eye opener to a couple generations of cop and MA's.....everyone remembers clearly Dan Inosanto's and Leo Gaje's 'object lessons' interspersed with bloody pictures quite well!

[sgtmac_46]

In fact, in several stabbings/knife assaults that I've investigated, the victims didn't know they'd been cut at first. Most thought they'd been punched until they discovered they were bleeding. That's been my experience as well. Most knife attacks are ambush assaults where the weapon was not ever even seen by the victim. The last one I had the victim didn't even know the suspect had followed him out of the bar until he got stabbed in the liver from behind.

[sgtmac_46]

Kinds of reminds me of a little impromptu demo my FMA instructor, Martin gave us last week. He saw his friend, the school's BJJ instructor, walk out of the office and called out, "Hey Tai, show these guys how quick you can get me onto the mat and make me submit". The BJJ guy obliged, taking down my instructor and applying a submission hold in a flash. My instructor immediately tapped out and then asked the BJJ guy, "Hey did you feel something working against your chest? Take a look!" Tai, the BJJ pro, leaned back and saw that Martin, the FMA guy, had pulled out his folding metal training knife and had totally worked over his chest and gut. "Damn! I NEVER even saw that!!!" Lesson learned. Tai is an awesome fighter, but he would have been cut to ribbons before he was aware that the other guy even had a knife. Scarey! The advantage goes to knife, even when the skill is far superior to the unarmed guy. Knife is an AWESOME advantage and equalizer, and changes ALL fight equations.

[sgtmac_46]

Very often in those scenarios what happens is that both parties take serious damage...one from bullets, one from a knife. Just because you can put a bullet in him before he is all the way there doesn't mean he won't take you with him, and the 21' rule has that factored into it. And statistics show that single handgun gun shot wounds are often more survivable than serious single stab wounds.

[sgtmac_46]

Good comments from everyone. I suppose it depends upon what it means by close quarters, in other words how close, and if the gun is drawn and if the gun man has every intention to pull the trigger the moment you resist. I do believe it is obvious that a drawn gun outside the reach of someone is obviously more dangerous than a knife, than again that might not be considered close quarter. If the gunman has a gun to your back with every intention to pull the trigger the moment you make your move, obviously the gun would be more dangerous. But if he is in the process of drawing a gun within arms length, than I can agree that the knife might indeed be more dangerous, and I see your point. I would prefer to go against a guy with a knife rather than a gun in most situations, and it should be kept in mind that it is likely guns were not the primary weapon Fairbairn dealt with as a police officer, knives were far more common in Shanghai back than. But good comments all, and without a doubt a knife does give someone a tremendous advantage, I just believe that some guy who doesn't know what he's doing with a knife automatically becomes a 12th degree black belt is hyperbole, with all due respect to John Perkins. What does 'know what he's doing with a knife' really mean to you? Does it mean he's some high level, ranked and frocked grand mufti of some system? How about just a big, angry man with no formal training, and murderous intent, who's stabbed people before, and who's single driving desire is to run you through?

Do you think some formal 12th degree black belt in knife-fu-do somehow trumps that? I think we do ourselves a disservice to believe that 'formal training' equals superior skill. The knife is a simple instrument, and it doesn't require complicated training to utilize effectively. Push the knife in, pull out, repeat as needed as rapidly and powerfully as possible. Here's a good example of how that really looks.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibGyGG3X4PI

Oh, and this is a good wakeup call....<warning: not for the squeemish' Notice the REAL knife attack at the 1:45 mark......what style of martial arts do you think he was using? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92smVb1jWzw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5LQ5ddZ_b0&feature=related

Now, there are some who've commented on knife defense 'Oh yeah, i'd just use my kung-fu parry and then crush his trachea with my knife edge hand strike'.....ahuh.....

You should watch how REAL knife attacks occur, and train accordingly. Why do we show prison knife attacks? Because someone who has been in HERE is who you're going to run in to on the street if you ever find yourself confronted by a knife! It's as fine a 'dojo' for knife attacks as you'll ever see!



And keep in mind that the largest mass-murder in US history was committed with box-cutters......the human mind is the weapon, and it's ability to apply tools in violently destructive ways is only limited by his imagination, creativity and desire to destroy! Never underestimate the 'other'.

[jks9199]

The advantage goes to knife, even when the skill is far superior to the unarmed guy. Knife is an AWESOME advantage and equalizer, and changes ALL fight equations.
Which, I think, is the point of the quote about a knife making anyone a 12th degree black belt.

Kind of like the one about how Sam Colt made all men equal...

[sgtmac_46]

Which, I think, is the point of the quote about a knife making anyone a 12th degree black belt.

Kind of like the one about how Sam Colt made all men equal... That's why man picked up a rock and a stick when he fell out of the tree, rather than work on his 'monkey style'.

It's all about gaining a mechanical advantage. ;)

[Joab]

I see your point, the knife is a tremendous advantage. Again, I would prefer to go against someone with a knife than a gun. Others disagree. Neither would be preferable.

The truth is I know of guys who were very skilled take out a guy who wasn't very good with a knife with a quick kick, I haven't heard such things about someone with a gun. All you have to do is pull a trigger, with a knife you have to thrust the knife towards the body, with a gun you can be out of reach. Anyone who believes a loaded, cocked gun pointed at you and to far away to reach with an arm or leg is less dangerous than a knife is living an illusion, your simply wrong, period. I hope that isn't what anyone was arguing, I hope I misunderstood some of the arguements.

[sgtmac_46]

I see your point, the knife is a tremendous advantage. Again, I would prefer to go against someone with a knife than a gun. Others disagree. Neither would be preferable.

The truth is I know of guys who were very skilled take out a guy who wasn't very good with a knife with a quick kick, I haven't heard such things about someone with a gun. All you have to do is pull a trigger, with a knife you have to thrust the knife towards the body, with a gun you can be out of reach. Anyone who believes a loaded, cocked gun pointed at you and to far away to reach with an arm or leg is less dangerous than a knife is living an illusion, your simply wrong, period. I hope that isn't what anyone was arguing, I hope I misunderstood some of the arguements. Anyone who says 'either/or' really misunderstands the point. It's not as if some bad guy is going to give you a choice 'You want me to use the gun or the knife'. They are both different, and at close range the knife is more dangerous. A gun fires in one direction, and is only dangers straight from the muzzle on......the rest of the gun makes a good handle to grab and control, not so a knife.

Again, the question of which is more dangerous depends on how you encounter them.....and none of those differences are variables you can control.

[Rich Parsons]

Go check this video out. It's by Paul Vunak I got it off of youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk-EVLyIpts

I think it really kind of puts knife fighting into a good context right off the bat. Now I have to say this. I don't care if a man can clear 20ft. in 1.5 secs, against a good quick draw he's dead. I mean hell, I can draw my .45 and fire in .5 a second. So that still, leaves roughly .89 depending on the length of the mans arms and the knife, to still aim and fire. And there are guys out there that can do it in .2 of a second. That's really fast! So knife vs. gun, again depends on training levels of the two individuals.

So if I had to choose one. I would choose a knife, the two times I've been involved with a knife, I was very lucky and walked away in one piece. Plus I can run if it's necassary. A gun, I might still be able to run, but he might be a very good shot, so.....I might not get very far. Hehe! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif


While I have been able to clear that distance, I was also with my limited training and planning, was able to clear a plastic test pistol before the distance was covered. We shortened it from 20 feet to 15 and then to 10 and then to 5 feet.

At 20 feet I was able to step back (* create space *) and doing it off line.

At 15 feet, I was able to step back and kneel down and I was able to get a "Shot" off but I was counter attacked.

At 10 feet, I was able to step back and fall back and clear the weapon and "fire". As I was prone I was out of the immediate attack of his weapon, but I would have been at an extreme negative situation if there were friends, or if he fell on me with his weapon.

At 5 Feet, I almost always reacted to the weapon at hand in the opponents control and only after I had reacted did I try to gain distance and or control and to deal with surviving, first then worrying about taking him out.

[sidecarr]

we use a traing knife with red ink on the blade end seems no matter how good you are you will get cut

[Andy Moynihan]

we use a traing knife with red ink on the blade end seems no matter how good you are you will get cut


You gotta look at empty handed knife defenses the same way you would look at lottery tickets.

Winning nothing while trying something that at least has a chance you might win something beats winning nothing while trying nothing at all.

[Archangel M]

All of the gun v knife arguments always seen to take the "you with a holstered weapon, him with a knife in hand" - "him attacking you defending" approach. The Tueller and all the rest, while good illustrations of a valid point take a dynamic combination of factors and reduce it to a "set piece" demonstration ... IMO what it comes down to is initiative. Who decides to attack, who is aware of the threat and who has a weapon in hand first is more important than which weapon is "superior". If you have an enemy who is within 21' with ANY WEAPON and decides to make the first move, while you wait to respond...you are in big trouble.

Its basic OODA in my opinion. If the guy in the Tueller drill knows that the knifer is coming for him (which he does) he should "cheat" and run..place an obstacle between themselves and start issuing commands and/or start shooting. I know..I know the drill is meant to illustrate the importance of a "reactionary gap" and lateral movement, but I hope Ive made my opinion clear.

[arnisador]

All true--the 18'/21' rule makes an excellent point, but it doesn't cover all situations.

[kyosa]

Sgt. Dennis Tueller, a Salt Lake City Police officer and defensive tactics trainer, developed what is called the "21 ft. rule," throguh a pretty extensive study which basically shows that a person can travel about that far in 1.5 seconds, and that if an officer has his sidearm holstered and is attacked by a person with a knife within that range, he can't deploy his weapon fast enough to respond reliably.

That basically means that within that range, the guy with the gun in his holster gets stabbed (the moist likely attack by an untrained knife wielder), maybe repeatedly.

Never mind what someone trained with a knife can do....



Stabbed someone with a pen once, and wound up with a face and mouth full of their blood and getting to watch them die. Wayyyy better than getting killed, but not a pleasant experinece, either.

That said, people often can go on fighting for a while with a knife wound, depending on where it is, and survivors of knife attacks often report thinking they were simply punched, not stabbed....

This has been changed now to 30' by many DT instructors, so 30' is the new 21'

[kyosa]

In fact, in several stabbings/knife assaults that I've investigated, the victims didn't know they'd been cut at first. Most thought they'd been punched until they discovered they were bleeding.

You are so correct-we had a guy stabbed 5 times in the chest with a 3" knife who said the guys punches were "simply devestating." He didn't realize he had been stabbed until the police arrived. Guy stuck his arms up to try to protect himself and the last strike was from the side and collapsed his lung.

[kyosa]

And statistics show that single handgun gun shot wounds are often more survivable than serious single stab wounds.

According to my spontanious knife defense instructor knife wound survivability is at about 35% and gun shot wounds survivability are at 60%. I am taking these figures off the top of my head so they may be off by a couple percentage points. According to the instructor these were FBI statistics on victims surviving one or more attacks by these types of weapons nationally.

[arnisador]

This has been changed now to 30' by many DT instructors, so 30' is the new 21'

I hadn't heard that! Do you know of an article/vid clip making that argument for extending it? I'd be curious to read it.

[Archangel M]

According to my spontanious knife defense instructor knife wound survivability is at about 35% and gun shot wounds survivability are at 60%. I am taking these figures off the top of my head so they may be off by a couple percentage points. According to the instructor these were FBI statistics on victims surviving one or more attacks by these types of weapons nationally.

Ahh I question these type of statistics. "Knife wounds" to what part of the body? Bullet strikes to what target? How many stabs vs how many shots? Not that the basic assumption isnt true, but the numbers always strike me as arbitrary.

[thardey]

These types of questions always remind me of the "what the coolest sword/ship/airplane/knife/nuclear warhead" type of threads.

Both knives and pistols are deadly weapons. Both have appropriate and inappropriate uses.

Has anyone tried the Tueller drill in reverse? How about we give a guy a drawn handgun, have him stand 21' away, while the defender waits with an assisted-open pocketknife in his pocket?

How much you wanna bet the guy with the knife gets shot before he can draw and deploy his blade? Let alone have the chance to defend himself?

My point is that if you're weapon is not deployed, and you're enemy's is -- you're in serious trouble. Whatever the configuration. Under equal circumstances, a sword is superior to a knife -- unless the sword is still in the sheath, amd the knife is not.

Guns have to be pointed, knives do not.
Guns have to be reloaded, knives do not.
Knives are limited in range to the length of your arm, guns are not.
Guns produce the same amount of kinetic energy, at the same ranges, regardless of the size and training of the person pulling the trigger.
Knives are easier to hide while deployed than guns.
Knives are quiet, guns go Bang!
Knives help me open bags of horse feed and haybales -- guns are awkward for this. (same goes for buttering my toast.)

I respect both, and carry both.

The only advantage to empty hands as weapons (and it is a considerable advantage) is that we always have our hands "deployed" and ready to use.

[Archangel M]

Ditto.

I would even change "deployed" to "having the intention to use". If I "know" Im going to attack you and you dont, I am going to have the initiative. The Tueller drill already has the "one guy will attack" as a given. While you have to be alert, aware and prepared at all times, you cant live life at 30' from every stranger.

[jks9199]

Ahh I question these type of statistics. "Knife wounds" to what part of the body? Bullet strikes to what target? How many stabs vs how many shots? Not that the basic assumption isnt true, but the numbers always strike me as arbitrary.
Don't forget the circumstances. Bullet wounds tend to get more immediate treatment, for lots of reasons.

[kyosa]

I hadn't heard that! Do you know of an article/vid clip making that argument for extending it? I'd be curious to read it.

I did some SORT training with the Minnesota Dept of Corrections. During the spontanious knife defense training last year the instructor made the comment "30' is the new 21' rule." I have since heard that statement a couple times now from other officers. I will check with PPCT's program and see what their official take is on this.

One other comment to make regarding the knife as a weapon-I have said for years that a guy with a little knife training is equal to most black belts. I have tried this with several black belts from other systems-let me give someone with no martial arts experience or warrior training 4 hours of training that has about the same physical ability as the black belt. the fight will be about even. after 4 hours of training put on some protective equipment and a magic marker for the knife. Everyone of the black belts have been "marked" some of them extensively and probably would have died from the wounds received. It's a wake up call for many.

Speaking of the Doc training we had to escape from a housing unit with a knife wielding inmate trying to stick us with a shank the whole way. The inmate is between you and the only door out of the housing unit. Right off the bat I slipped and lost my footing-didnt fall but was off balance as the inmate was attacking and barely evaded the first strike. The inmate was the instructor and had pretty good skills with a knife. As he came in for more strikes I evaded 2-3 and was able to strike him twice and move toward the door. He stayed on me and kept trying to stab me with rapid fire strikes as I moved toward the door facing him. Just as I got to the door to escape he stuck me in the thigh with what would have been a femoral artery stab. This attack would have been fatal or potentially fatal depending on whether I could get some quick clot (not available at the time) or a tourniquet. In order to do either one of those I would have had to take the inmate out. Doesn't matter how much training you have-guy comes at you with a knife you're probably going to get cut-you really have to take the guy out quick as possible. If you dont take the knife serious I think you will change your view quickly after first contact

[GBlues]

What about space??? Let's say that you do react and haven't been cut by the invisible knife when it is first deployed and now you know that it's a tool being utilized by your opponent. If you have room to move, and are faster on your feet, you can stay away from the knife. Even just random slashes most people still have a pattern that they follow. So if you can stay alive long enough to figure out the pattern?? I mean I'm just throwing this out there, but I think that would take away the 12th degree blackbelt syndrome. Of course if you have space to move, you probably have space to run so, maybe it doesn't matter. LOL!:asian:

[Bruno@MT]

You won't have time to learn the patterns.
Patterns are exposed by attacks. You'd have to evade several consecutive attacks for this to work. You will get cut.

In class, we learn techniques to defend against knife attacks.
They are valuable for the purpose of learning body movement, because they are committed attacks. I.e. a stab is a stab with follow through.
In real life, people don't do that. They slash and stab like wild, at full speed.
Even if you block you get slashed.

For actual use in a knife fight, I would never employ anything fancy.
Either run like hell, or try to grab the wrist of the hand holding the knife and attack from there and without mercy.

[Joab]

You won't have time to learn the patterns.
Patterns are exposed by attacks. You'd have to evade several consecutive attacks for this to work. You will get cut.

In class, we learn techniques to defend against knife attacks.
They are valuable for the purpose of learning body movement, because they are committed attacks. I.e. a stab is a stab with follow through.
In real life, people don't do that. They slash and stab like wild, at full speed.
Even if you block you get slashed.

For actual use in a knife fight, I would never employ anything fancy.
Either run like hell, or try to grab the wrist of the hand holding the knife and attack from there and without mercy.

Getting back to my original post, while I concede that it is normative for someone with a knife to have a tremendous advantage over someone without any weapon except his empty hands, my thoughts go back to my former wing chun Sifu. When he kicked and hit the mook jon dummy(I may have misspelled it, it's been awhile) I couldn't even see all the hits and kicks it was so fast. I saw the dummy move and heard the sounds, but his speed was almost super human, and very powerful. Now let's say you have this sifu against some 13 year old wannabee gang member trying to impress his friends and having no idea who he is up against (The sifu was average sized) I really do believe the Sifu would have the advantage, the kid would have been kicked and hit and down on the ground before he even made his move. That is why I don't agree that in every situation the knife wielder has the advantage, in most cases yes, but against such a fast moving efficient fighter as the Sifu, the Sifu would have the advantage.

[arnisador]

Try it. Use a marking training blade.

Of course this can happen. I know a LEO who defended against a knife attack with a single well-timed jab; the same has happened on occasion to me in sparring. But if the kid just gets a hand up--even after the first hit--the next punch is coming in along the knife. He'll cut his own arm.

[Joab]

Try it. Use a marking training blade.

Of course this can happen. I know a LEO who defended against a knife attack with a single well-timed jab; the same has happened on occasion to me in sparring. But if the kid just gets a hand up--even after the first hit--the next punch is coming in along the knife. He'll cut his own arm.

I think in the case of this Sifu the punches and kicks would be so fast he would hit the ground before even beginning his move towards the Sifu. This is a scenario when the little wannabe gang member is holding the knife in front of the Sifu acting tough in front of his friends, not beginning the attack, posturing at this point. If the little punk had begun his attack, than I agree, there is a good chance even this completely outstanding Sifu would at least get cut, and the punk might even prevail if he got lucky.

[BLACK LION]

at bad breath distances a knife knows no equal... a knife has so many options for success while a firearm only has one...

now... nothing is more powerful than the human brain and the body... one can affectrute ample injury bare handed... If I was being attacked by a blade runner and I was armed with a firearm I wouldnt even bother to unholster it... I would use my body weapons as a neutralizer

From 10 feet one can effectively deploy and agress a target with a blade faster than someone can reach from a holster, present the firearm and take a shot... even if they did get the gun out and pop one off it most likely will not fully stop the action of the agressor and the knife may still hit its mark....

[kyosa]

I hadn't heard that! Do you know of an article/vid clip making that argument for extending it? I'd be curious to read it.

I had a chance to do some looking last night. According to Bill Lewinski of the Force Science Research Center "its easily possible for suspects in some circumstances to launch a successful fatal attack from a distance greater than 21 ft."

John Delgado, retired training officer for the Miami-Dade PD. has extended the 21 ft rule to 30 ft. "Twenty one feet doesn't really give many officers time to get their gun out and fire accurately. High security holsters complicate the situation, for one thing. Some manufacturers recommend 3,000 pulls to develop proficiency with a holster. Most cops don't do that, so it takes them longer to get their gun out than what is ideal. Also shooting proficiency tends to deteriorate under stress. Their initial rounds may not even hit."

"Beyond that, there's the well-established fact that a suspect often can keep going from momentum, adrenalin, chemicals and sheer determination, even after being shot. Experience informs us that people who are shot with a handgun do not fall down instantly nor does the energy of the handgun round stop their forward movement" states Chris Lawrence, team leader of DT training at the Ontario Police College. "Certain arterial or spinal hits may drop an attacker instantly. But otherwise a wounded but committed suspect may have the capacity to continue on to the officer's location and complete his deadly intentions."

"When working with bare-minimum margins, any delay in an officer responding to a deadly threat can equate to injury or death...so the officer must key his or her reaction to the first overt act indicating that a lethal attack is coming" reinforces attorney and use of force trainer Bill Everett an FSRC national advisory board member. "So the officer must key his or her reaction to the first overt act indicating that a lethal attack is coming."

edited to correct typo's rotated to midnight shift and I am half asleep-sorry

[Hudson69]

I am a Police Officer in Colorado and my experience with small blades comes from here. I think a knife is the pre-eminent weapon when up close and personal. I will admit that a gun is more dangerous but a gun requires the ability to put the business end on target to be effective (unless you are using it as a club) and to be held a certian way in order to employ it but a knife has no moving parts, can defeat most body armors, can be functionally used from a variety of holds and is even more concealable. (The 21 foot rule is something that was taught in my academy as well.)

On a side note, almost every Officer I work with carries one or more knives (I carry two if you include my SOG multi-tool). My primary knife is a fixed blade behind my spare mags in a way that it is accessible with either hand.

[Nervous Smile]

Even though I have lived near or around rough neighborhoods for much of my life, I have only had the misfortune of having a knife pulled on me a handful of times.

Knives are damn scary.

Most of the punks who pulled them on me were middle school bullies with their big bro's switchblade, and even a timid attacker like that is liable to cut you a few times. I've still got scars on my arms to prove that.

Worse still is someone who is determined or who knows what they're doing. In my experience I've had to fall back and throw side kicks at the knees, which usually gave me a chance to gain control over the weapon.

Still, though... I've yet to find a fail-safe way to deal with a guy with a knife.

[Mark Jordan]

"In a way, knives are more dangerous than guns, because there are two things you need to be concerned about with knives. The point, and the edge. The point is like the bullet from a gun. It moves in a straight line and can penetrate. The edge, or blade is another story. It can move in any direction, and is dangerous in all of them." http://www.alljujitsu.com/self-defense-programs.html

The only time you should even attempt to fight against a knife is if you have no other option but to fight back. In this case, pick up anything preferably something big to throw at them or whack them with... anything to distract them and give you time to escape,