Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
for bad angles, Nazi Greatcoats, pack-harnesses, incomplete thrusts, etc, so they put a 7" blade on their Commando Dagger. Today's punks must be 3x as thick and tough as German soldiers were, cause clowns claim you "need" 20" of penetration. The only way you'd need that much penetration is if he was crawling backwards at you, and you "had" to shoot him in the ass. More than 10" of penetration is a BAD idea, really, especially in ccw guns, and 8" is either plenty, or your hit was really a miss. Arm first hit is a miss, so why why blame the bullet-round, for what was a failure by the shooter, hmm?

You CAN'T get contolable loads in compact ccw guns, other than my Split Nose bullets, that is, that offer BOTH deep penetration AND lots of shock and tissue damage. So the best you can do is stagger load the mag with piercers and shockers, and fire lots of rounds at the guy, and get good hits, be ready to brain shoot him if you have to do so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
The only way you'd need that much penetration is if he was crawling backwards at you, and you "had" to shoot him in the ass.
LOFL

IIRC the FBI standard is 14", which seems reasonable enough for oblique hits, shoulder, taking into account bone, etc. I think that the "inches" figure is derived from gelatin monsters, anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
and bullets penetrate MORE deeply in flesh than in "bare" 10% gelatin. The FBI figure WAS 20", and then they took so much flack about the sheer stupidity of THAT number that they backed off to 14", and it's STILL 50% more than is needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
Post links if ypu want anyonr to belteve ypu.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,690 Posts
Fairbairn and Sykes felt that 7" was a good balance of concealment by SOE/OSS/resistance agents and effectiveness. Also, note that knives wound by cutting, not crushing like pistol bullets, and therefore do not need deep penetration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
u r fos. Knives need DEEPER penetration, because blood loss is ALL they CAN offer. The dagger is not a slashing tool,and the Commandoes had little need of concealment, and could easily conceal a MUCH longer blade, up a sleeve, down the neck, in a boottop, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,690 Posts
andy said:
u r fos. Knives need DEEPER penetration, because blood loss is ALL they CAN offer. The dagger is not a slashing tool,and the Commandoes had little need of concealment, and could easily conceal a MUCH longer blade, up a sleeve, down the neck, in a boottop, etc.
The F-S knives were originally developed in Shanghai. The Commandoes adopted them later.

F.o.s., moi? Perhaps, but you are still wrong.

The Romans, like the Spaniards from whom they got the short sword, taught their troops that a 2" penetration was lethal to an enemy soldier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
andy said:
u r fos. Knives need DEEPER penetration, because blood loss is ALL they CAN offer. The dagger is not a slashing tool,and the Commandoes had little need of concealment, and could easily conceal a MUCH longer blade, up a sleeve, down the neck, in a boottop, etc.
As a blackbelt (according to you), you should know better than that. 1/4" of blade is sufficient to sever most of the important veins and arteries.

Jugular, femoral, radial, etc.

Not to mention trachea, most of the important tendons and muscle groups. (having flexors cut can really fvck up your day)

Longer blades allow for defending the hand holding the weapon, as they give you a larger slashing surface to ward off attacks and inflict damage at the same time.

Most of the movements will be slashing types, we trained for using a "Z" sweep, figure 8 or circular movements, punctuated with stabs at specific targets. (usually out of Earth blade, sometimes using Sky)

Generally, the slashes are enough to decapacitate and kill, the stabs are "gravy".

I'd be asking for the money spent on your black belt back....

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
Aslan said:
I'd be asking for the money spent on your black belt back....

:devil:
I don't that 'Tards 'r Us' makes refunds.

RIKA :nyah:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
bullets penetrate MORE deeply in flesh than in "bare" 10% gelatin.
In a properly calibrated gel block, a .177 caliber BB at only 590fps must penetrate something like 3 1/2 inches, and you're saying that a BB rifle will penetrate "MORE deeply" than that in an actual person or animal.

Basically, you're claiming that a BB gun (not pellet, BB) will through-and-through a raccoon, housecat or an adult man's upper arm. Do you really believe that..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
I really don't know where to begin responding to this old thread Melvin started.
Surprised I didn't jump in back then but I was probably working 1-1/2 to double shifts.
Anyway this ain't 2004 and it certainly ain't the 70's or even the 80's.
I already said I carry loads with proven street performance.
An acquaintance of mine who's about to retire has used it in the line of duty recommended 135gr+p Critical Duty so that's one of the loads I buy and carry in either my Glock 19 or 26.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
I don't know. It's just the intense hostility combined with absolute ignorance that gets me to comment sometimes. I mean a steel .177 BB weighs 4.8 to 5.5 grains; so at 590fps it has a total of 4 ft/lbs of energy. Four.

And his claim is that this tiny spherical ball that's both aerodynamically and hydrodynamically horrible, will still penetrate more than 3 1/2 inches of living animal. Thing is, he also often says that "energy is the ability to do work" and that's true, but here we're supposed to ignore the fact that absence of energy equals the absence of the ability to do work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
for bad angles, Nazi Greatcoats, pack-harnesses, incomplete thrusts, etc, so they put a 7" blade on their Commando Dagger. Today's punks must be 3x as thick and tough as German soldiers were, cause clowns claim you "need" 20" of penetration. The only way you'd need that much penetration is if he was crawling backwards at you, and you "had" to shoot him in the ass. More than 10" of penetration is a BAD idea, really, especially in ccw guns, and 8" is either plenty, or your hit was really a miss. Arm first hit is a miss, so why why blame the bullet-round, for what was a failure by the shooter, hmm? . . . .
There are a lot of things in life that I do not and, perhaps, never will know; but knife and gunfighting are not among them.

British Military/Police Captain William Ewart Fairbairn never said that it takes seven (7) inches of steel in order to guarantee reaching the heart from all angles and directions of attack.

What Captain Fairbairn said is that: It takes five (5) inches of steel in order to reach the heart from all angles and directions of attack! Now, let's keep this discussion 'apples for apples'. The fact that a bullet needs to penetrate for a full 12 to 14 inches is NOT the same thing as saying that a knife's blade must be five inches long.

A knife cuts and punctures in direct proportion to the amount of force that is applied to the blade. It does not transfer kinetic energy in the same way that a small lead ball does. Consequently, in this particular analogy length does matter; and it does take 12 to 14 inches of bullet penetration in order to do similar (but not identical) damage to what can be achieved by using only a 5 inch knife blade!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Garand
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top