SOTB Knife Fight

[CoLawman]

I think I can say with a reasonable amount of certainty that this scenario would not be played out on the streets of America. Given the length of this debacle, less than lethal weapons could have and would have been deployed if there was some reluctance to fire the guns. Hmmmmmmmm this looks like a job for Protectojet or maybe a bean bag round, or possibly a sock round. Maybe firing a wooden baton at the dirtbags groin would have stopped him/them. I do not think this is an appropriate place for a Tazer.

Anyway the point is, most American officers arriving on scene of Keystone would have popped their trunk and ended this within moments with one of many choices from their arsenals............again, if their was some unknown reluctance to use deadly force.

Then we would have kicked the ever living snot out of them, like observed in Keystone.......ha ha ha ha!

[frostfire]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

You have to determine ahead of time if someone might have a blade, and be prepared to deal with them, perhaps after being cut.

You can take a knife away from someone if you know what you are doing and the other person is not skilled. You will probably get cut doing it. You need to understand this ahead of time and make your best guess.

http://www.hockscqc.com/knife/index.htm
scroll down for the sample cases...having a "bulletproof mind" definitely help in such scenarios
Also here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tHf_pvv4zo

just my 0.0002 cents, sometimes it's handy to show the knives/weapon on the first place. This is a different scenario of course since the goal is to deter potential attacker(s) or even avoid bloodier confrontation.
I saw first hand on street of 3rd world country a small guy pulled a knife from the leg, held it in ice pick position, and made a stance/clear determination that if he were to go down, he'd bring at least one of the 3 thugs along. The 3 thugs ran away, and he went away as well in the opposite direction.

[hellokitty]

Hi All, The distance which was once considered safe when facing an opponent armed with an edged weapon was once considered to be 7mts or 21 ft ( the Tueller drill ) it has since been reviewed and a lot of LE agencies have gone to 10mts or 30ft as a safe minimum , the problem however comes from the fact most serious knife users wont be showing the blade untill you are on top of them or they close distance and engage , I am stunned by the videos shown in this thread and that the LEOs did not shoot earlier, and at how close they allowed the BGs to get to themselves , any of these videos could have been a lot worse . The question of less lethal options such as bean bag rounds and tasers raised is a very valid one , but IMHO for LEOs only , in a military or self defence situation i would seek cover and shoot till threat ceases as in reality this is the best way to execute a knife disarm against a motivated opponent, Good instruction on knife disarms and defences that are realistic and workable can be found from Jerry Wetzel and the Red Zone or Stab programs or if at Bragg send me a PM and i will put you in contact with a good source of up to date info on this subject, all the best , respectfully Kitty.

[Team Sergeant]

This is where some of us differ. I would quickly close the distance for two reasons:

One to ensure no friendlies would be able to move laterally into my line of fire and two to also ensure I had a backstop for the six rounds I pump into the knife wielding bad guy.

I would advocate moving forward in a gun/knife fight (against punks) which is what 99.999% of what the Law Enforcement faces today.

Todays LEO’s have, IMO, been taught tooooo much in the “defensive” tactics department. There are times when, in order to save lives that the street cop goes on the “offensive”.

Lose your focus, even for a moment, and you could lose your life. If you are “moving to cover” and do not have someone else to cover your movement you will lose focus. Stay focused on your target, always move in a decisive manner, and only move as fast as you can accurately engage your target.

If knife fighting was all that lethal the US Military would have a Field Manual on knife fighting. Would I ever use a knife in a fight? You bet, when I run out of bullets....

[The Reaper]

I think there is a legal aspect to this as well (on the civilian side), and it is easier to defend if you were stationary or withdrawing rather than advancing, which could be viewed in court as an aggressive move.

If you are outside of his reach, you are unlikely to be cut by a knife wielder. If you close the distance to engagement range and employ lethal force, who is responsible?

Any of our counsel care to voice an opinion about the better CoA from a legal perspective?

Agree with kitty, our edged weapon trainer says that trained cutters will not flash the knife in advance of an attack. More like an attack similar to a shanking in prison. Which is probably where they acquired their training.

TR

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I think there is a legal aspect to this as well (on the civilian side), and it is easier to defend if you were stationary or withdrawing rather than advancing, which could be viewed in court as an aggressive move.

If you are outside of his reach, you are unlikely to be cut by a knife wielder. If you close the distance to engagement range and employ lethal force, who is responsible?


TR

In some states civilians have no “legal” responsibility to “withdraw” from a fight. This is catching on I hope.

Again, I would NEVER advocate a “uniformed Police” Officer (s) withdraws from a knife wielding punk. (Then again I've not really heard of a “Professional” knife fighter taking on police officers in a fight.)

Place yourself into mind of your knife brandishing adversary, he’s just waiting (as in the movie) for a chance to employ his knife. When you lose focus, even for a second, is when he will attack.

If a punk with a knife is within 21 feet (most LEO agencies agree with this distance) and shows intent to do harm law enforcement officers can employ lethal force. Allowing the same punk with a knife to close that distance, as shown in the movie is foolish.

It a police officers job to enforce the laws, if he must be aggressive in order to accomplish his mission, so be it.

[The Reaper]

Not looking to throw gasoline on this, but let's verify the civilian (LE, not military) scenario I think we are alluding to. This is separate from the video scenario above.

The knife wielder/punk/American citizen is at 30 feet brandishing, but stationary.

You have legal basis to shoot if he is within 21 feet.

You choose to immediately advance to within 21 feet to shoot, rather than wait him out or further verify his intentions.

Do you think this will withstand criminal and civil review?

I can pretty much state with certainty that if you were to do this as an armed citizen, you are going downtown to the lock-up.

TR

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Not looking to throw gasoline on this, but let's verify the civilian (LE, not military) scenario I think we are alluding to. This is separate from the video scenario above.

The knife wielder/punk/American citizen is at 30 feet brandishing, but stationary.

You have legal basis to shoot if he is within 21 feet.

You choose to immediately advance to within 21 feet to shoot, rather than wait him out or further verify his intentions.

Do you think this will withstand criminal and civil review?

I can pretty much state with certainty that if you were to do this as an armed citizen, you are going downtown to the lock-up.

TR

TR,

I’m commenting on the movie and how the LEO’s handled the situation, how I would advise law enforcement to do otherwise given the same scenario.

In your scenario, a punk brandishing a knife at 30 feet, no others within 21 feet of him, no one else in the scenario, after I stopped laughing, I would pull my CCW, inform the punk that his current course of action might lead to grievous bodily harm on his part, wait for his reaction and if he decided to move in my direction take the appropriate action in order to neutralize the threat.

I would not run for cover or move to cover, I would not take my eyes off the threat, not for a moment, I would not move forward but hold my ground and wait for the punk to make the first move.

I would however move forward to engage if said punk was threatening the life of another human being, as in the movie.

And yes, given this scenario I would hope it would stand up in a court of law.

[The Reaper]

Roger all, that clears it up.

I thought that you were advocating advancing within legal shooting range in all gun on knife situations.

Thanks for elaborating.

TR

[hellokitty]

Hi Team Sgt , Reaper and friends , I wasnt too specific when i said move to cover , I wasnt sugesting to run for cover or to lose focus on the knife , a better option is just to have something between you and them , like a car or telegraph pole etc , I als o agee with Team Sgt about "professional" knifefighters , there is no such creature but if there was there would probably be some good HD pay in it , if not limited by legal concerns , IMO closing the distance when armed with a firearm gives away your advantage , every step closer to a trained or untrained knifer takes you closer to his range and increases your risk. I honestly dont have a great knowledge of self defence laws in the US so can only offer an opinion based on ours in Australia where we do have a "duty of retreat" and as such was really commenting more for the SF people here who operate under differing rules of engagement , my comments for self defence in the US for civvies was based on assumption and as such I happily defer to you all for info on whats acceptable and whats not. I am with Team Sgt on closing the distance to a knifer IF you cant run and you are armed with an edged or impact weapon, as , if you turn your back and run and have nowhere to go you are going to have serious problems and a very sore back or neck all the best , respectfully Kitty