Reverse edge ?
This is a discussion on Reverse edge ? within the Defensive Knives & Other Weapons forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Craig, good to see you here. In reference to my comments about purpose driven knives, every time I say that a picture of a fixed ...
June 4th, 2009 11:48 AM
Craig, good to see you here. In reference to my comments about purpose driven knives, every time I say that a picture of a fixed blade karambit usually pops into my head. I have handled every knife in your line, and like anything from Trace they are all top notch. He made me a thicker than usual Lil Loco a few years back that I am very fond of.
As far as point driven methods, they are very effective if the user is willing. I believe that you are of the same mindset as me and would cave an attacker’s head in with a rock if that is what it took.
Since we both have about the same time on the job, I imagine you have found as I have that the longer you are on the job the less it seems younger officers want to physically engage. Hell, many old timers have no interest. I would also imagine that like the guys on my job, the average cop in your agency is not enthusiastic as far as pursuing the training you provide.
When considering the above in addition to believing that everyone has a right to protect themselves, I put my programs together. Since so many people who face danger everyday often fail to recognize it before it is to late, my intent is to give them skills to beat, cut, or shoot even when they are far behind the curve. Unlike the uniformed police officer, they are also likely to have friends and family in tow.
Craig, I believe we are in the same church in different pews.- George
June 4th, 2009 11:48 AM
June 4th, 2009 12:21 PM
That's fair. I just don't want people thinking they have to have ShivWorks tools to use REM.
In reference to my comments about purpose driven knives, every time I say that a picture of a fixed blade karambit usually pops into my head.
Indeed most cops don't care about training. There are two distinct varieties of copper coming on the job these days. One is the kid who has been socialized post Columbine that violence in any form is unacceptable. They've probably never been in a fist fight.
Then you have the other side of the coin and these are the guys coming home from active duty post 9/11 and entering law enforcement. Most are extremely capable and WILLING to use violence to solve a problem. Reconciling both camps into an effective, appropriate DT/Combatives/knife/ECQ curriculum has been challenging. I see fifty new police recruits a quarter and have the opportunity to lay the foundation for a training ethos. This is where having the ability to inspire a young cop that he can win and succeed is crucial. Most LE trainers, and even to a good extent private sector instructors generally tailor curriculum under the assumption that their student base is stupid or incapable.
Personally I believe that when people trust an instructor enough to make an investment in time, money, or both then they will generally try to live up to the expectation that the instructor holds them to. If mild contempt for your student base (i.e. you're to stupid or incapable to do X) permeates your demeanor then not only will that dictate what you teach, but how you teach it, and how the students perform.
I know there is a Lowest Common Denominator.....hell that would describe most of our ancient bailiffs. But a belief system is a powerful thing. And if you truly believe that most people are more capable than what they themselves even realize, then that's going to come out in your presentation. And if an instructor believes that, the students will generally believe it too and perform.
June 4th, 2009 12:48 PM
I agree on all points. There is nothing like training people who get it. Seeing them take information and putting it into action is a good feeling.
People always ask me if they need a dedicated knife for IET, my answer is know but certain knives would lend themselves more than others. Because of this a few custom makers have come to me asking if I mind them making knives for IET. Just like you, I believe if they want it they should have it.
Keep up the good work, one of these days we will get a chance to meet.- George
June 4th, 2009 01:02 PM
Something else I'd like to clarify here. I started doing FMA in 1987 under the Inosanto/Lacosta lineage. I did that hard and heavy for until '93 when I transitioned over to Pekiti Tersia almost exclusively. What I teach is essentially stripped down Pekiti.
I should mention that mercop's IET is edge driven in contrast to southnarc's point driven technique.
Why the nomenclature of Reverse Edge Methods? Simple. I don't have any instructor paper in Pekiti and didn't want to say I was teaching Pekiti and piss off the FMA community, even though they generally support my interpretation of it, these days.
With that being said I have a pretty firm grasp of conventional and reverse edge slashing and thrusting. I teach point first. Why? Because it's common to anything that protrudes from the top or bottom of your hand. One skill set....thrusting... that can be taught in short course format (two to four hours). It's time efficient.
Watch this video closely at 0:08. Reverse Edge slashing. Again at 0:14-0:18. Reverse Grip and Forward grip reverse edge slashing.
YouTube - ECQ Knife Reverse Edge Methods 2
Here's a tutorial I wrote and posted on SelfDefenseForums in 2003. That's six years ago.
Lots of edge work in there.
When I have time to teach it, like 8 or 16 hours, I do. Four hours or less? Point.
June 4th, 2009 01:19 PM
I didn't mean that as any kind of criticism. Trust me, I don't have enough knowledge of the subject to criticize. I've only been working with mercop and training on my own for a couple of months. I was just trying to clarify the subject of our discussion. Until I did some research a couple of days ago, everything of yours that I had seen was forward grip, reverse edge. Another member pointed out that you do a lot of reverse grip work as well.
Thanks for the video links!
June 4th, 2009 01:22 PM
Class act guys . Not for nothing ,I plan on attending a shivworks seminar as soon as possible .
June 4th, 2009 01:35 PM
No worries unloved. I didn't take it as negative criticism at all. I just wanted to expand everyone's awareness beyond the general assumption that all I do is point work. And with that being said the vast majority of what I teach in the private sector is firearms stuff. Like this:
ECQC Portland 09 on Vimeo
YouTube - ECQC Masking test
June 4th, 2009 06:54 PM
SouthNarc, good to see you here! I don't peek into this particular sub-forum often myself, but being on vacation, had a bit of extra time.
psychophipps, in regard to the subject on integration and how few instructors were teaching a wide range of stuff, back about posts 20-something through 25, I meant integration of the full range of empty hand through all weapons, including firearms, within one class/seminar. I was not limiting the weapons to contact weapons. Nothing against FMA at all, but how many FMA seminars leave a guy with painful welts from "sim" guns, all the bumps, bruises, and torn muscles and such from the hands-on stuff, and a pile of guns to clean upon arriving home? That is what I meant by integration.
June 4th, 2009 08:10 PM
We use airsoft, less expensive than simms, you can shoot point blank and easy cleanup. If what you are doing does not involve open hand, stick, knife and pistol work you don't have a system or a skill set. You have a bunch of stuff;)- George
June 4th, 2009 10:41 PM
And that is my main issue, really. I just have lots of "stuff" that I'm finally getting around to coalescing into a whole on my own with a few like-minded friends in a whimsy schedule that can be aptly described as "complete cluster&%$#".
Originally Posted by mercop
My main issue now is the complete lack of available local firearms training of any kind aside from a former Ranger friend who is over 10 years out of the military, let alone decent combative firearms training from a qualified instructor. Add that the local Martial Arts training all but disregards blades and clubs except in the area of basic defense from them and you get a picture of what I've been dealing with here for the last two years.
Long gone are the days of Portland, OR and the Small Circle Jujitsu dojo there where the open Saturdays meant I could literally learn from everything and we used knives and sticks regularly.
June 4th, 2009 11:47 PM
Besides SouthNarc, myself and a very few others that I know of (some of the best you will never hear of) there are very few instructors out there trying to blend it all together.
Open hand- often in the form of martial arts it is hard to blend in things like firearms when you are wearing a Gi and don't leave the dojo. I have a traditional MA background but realize it limitations.
Impact weapons- you have the FMA stylists who are like othe MAs are very good at what they do. The problem is that chances are you will not have your two favorite sticks when the SHTF. Often times they may have also never hit someone with a stick while in a real life situation.
Edged weapons- again we are back to the application. People just want to talk about fixed vs folder, serrated vs plain etc. IMHO the foundation of edged weapon training needs to be open hand vs edged weapon. Not only does this lend itself to better overall open hand combative skills, it is the thing you are most likely to have to do to survive and initial attack.
Firearms- ah yes, our favorite. What gun am I going to carry? What holster? What round? What will make me a better shooter? Too many people spending a weekend putting 1000 rounds into static cardboard targets and going home thinking that this is all they need to survive a real lethal altercation. No force on force, no huffing and puffing. Just lots of rounds down range starting on the buzzer.
It is up to the individual to do a personal inventory and learn their needs and limitations and then train accordingly.- George
June 5th, 2009 11:32 AM
Are there any spaces left for the Quakertown Edged Weapon Survival course? I've got a couple of people who're interested in attending. Hopefully at least one will make it. I need a training partner.
June 5th, 2009 12:40 PM
Since I don't know a heck of a lot of case law I can only speak in the theoretical, but it's theoretical that has a solid basis in understanding basic biology and the exercise of a little commonsense (o.k., maybe it's not so common).
"With that being said, I challenge anyone to find a single piece of case law anywhere that indicates using a knife a particular way has been deemed to be less "life threatening" than any other way. Knives and using knives are lethal force. Period."
If I'm attacked by someone with a knife or blunt force weapon and in defending myself the only wounds I inflected on the attacker are severing his quadricep tendon and tricep I don't think it takes F. Lee Bailey to make a rational, logical, scientifically accurate and persuasive argument that an attempt was made to use a lethal weapon in a non-lethal manner. If you can document that your training has been based in a non-lethal approach to using an edge weapon that adds to your legal defense.
Why no case law to support this? Maybe because the vast majority of applications of a knife are with the intent to kill. Most traditional MA edged weapons training is geared toward make lethal stabs and cuts. While FMA systems claim a "defanging the snake" approach in many cases the defanging is followed by decapitating the snake.
I echo what has been said a number of times in this thread. There are pros and cons to every method. You change method to add a dimension to your training but with a change of grip or edge orientation in many cases you loss something. You have to decide which of those somethings is more important to you with the understanding that in an altercation you may not have the luxury to make a situation, which makes it important to train using different grips and edge orientations.
The idea isn't to reinforce the non-conducive aspects of the instinctive reaction but to refine the instinctive reaction to make it more conduce to the tactical situation. That does require some training but not as much training as attempting to overcome those instinctive reactions and replacing thme with something totally different. And when the stuff hits the fan you are far more likely to react, revert back to training that is based on those instrinctive reactions.
"There are alot of things we do that are "instinctive" which may not be conducive to the tactical situation that we're presented. It's "instinctive" to flail around in a pool of water and then drown.....since swimming is learned."
For those that have the time and inclination I'd say investigate to your hearts content with respect to the various methods being taught. But my experience and common sense tells me that the most efficient (minimum of time and effort) method of training someone is using a method that couples an individuals instinctive reactions with some common practice (holding a knife in standard grip with edge down) they are already very well familar with. I'm not saying this should be the limit of their training but in my opinion that is the place to start.
June 5th, 2009 03:31 PM
Originally Posted by 2edgesword
I'm an attorney. I practice criminal defense.
I have also been a Kali practitioner formally since 2005, and prior to that been involved with Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu before that.
Knives, like guns, are considered lethal force weapons because they have the potential to cause great bodily harm or death very rapidly.
The standard for using them is the same as putting a bullet in someone's face - reasonable fear for your life or in fear of great bodily harm.
Your argument of "using a lethal weapon in a less than lethal manner" is the same as shooting someone in the leg to make them stop.
If you are in reasonable fear for your life or reasonable fear for your life or in fear of great bodily harm, you would have tried to put rounds into critical areas.
So to with a knife.
If you were not under such fear as to make your use of a lethal force weapon reasonable and justified, and thus able to make the exacting cuts you referenced above, you are unjustified in your use of force.
The law does not accept the consept of "I shot him in the leg as a way to stop the attack in a non-lethal manner with my firearm" nor does it accept "I cut him in a non-lethal manner"
Further, to make an effective enough cut to disable someone, you would have to make a very deep cut, thus a grave risk of severe blood loss, thus death - lethal force.
Additionally, just because you believe such a cut would stop someone, it does not make it so.
People have sustained solid hits to the torso with everything from Ranger Talon to ball out of a pistol...to 5.56mm rounds and fought on.
Your 'bio-mechanical' targeting may be at best ineffective; at worst cause the death of someone you legitimately had no reason to kill.
If you are going to use a knife, you do it with the same intent as you use a handgun with. You just target slightly differently.
As to explaining, and being F. Lee Bailey...Yeah...unless you wanted to hire a lawyer, have him find experts willing to put their professional creds behind your interpretation of knife use and litigate the matter in the aftermath of a use of force incident, you aren't going to win this one.
Knives are lethal force, same a firearms, hitting someone in the head with a sap, punching someone in the throat or applying a choke till someone's heart stops.
You use such things only when appropriate, and it's on the individual to make that determination according to the situation as it unfolds...
But you don't apply tools which will cause death or grave injury when they aren't appropriate.
June 5th, 2009 05:09 PM
"The standard for using them is the same as putting a bullet in someone's face - reasonable fear for your life or in fear of great bodily harm.
Your argument of "using a lethal weapon in a less than lethal manner" is the same as shooting someone in the leg to make them stop."
I'm not an attorney and you're wrong on both counts.
A knife is a contact weapon. I have to physically hold the knife and place it where I want it on the attackers body. I have MORE control over where I inflict wounds with a knife versus aiming or pointing shooting a firearm.
A firearm is used to transfer debilitating blute force to stop an attacker as quickly as possible. That is most effectively done by shooting center of mass. The same is NOT true with respect to a knife.
One major aspect of the power of a knife is it's ability to sever biomechanical connections that make it possible for an attacker to weld a weapon. The most effective use of a knife is NOT to inflict blunt force trama but biomechanic trama destroying an attackers ability to extend the arm required to impliment a weapon or leg required to the mobility apply the weapon. It doesn't matter how angry or high on PCP an individual might be, if I cut his quadricep tendon he can't stand. While stabbing him in the chest ten times may eventually result in his demise, in the interm he could continue his attack and still do a lot of damage, including taking my life.
"If you are in reasonable fear for your life or reasonable fear for your life or in fear of great bodily harm, you would have tried to put rounds into critical areas."
If you have fear for your life you do what is most prudent to negate the cause for the fear as quickly as possible. With a firearm that means introducing blute force center of mass. With a knife it means destroying the limbs that allow the attacker to exercise that threat.
Again, this goes back to the control issue and what constitutes the most effective use of the power of the particular weapon being deployed.
"The law does not accept the consept of "I shot him in the leg as a way to stop the attack in a non-lethal manner with my firearm" nor does it accept "I cut him in a non-lethal manner"
Again, I'm not an attorney but if I've heard it said once I've heard it said a thousand times "why did he have to kill him, couldn't he have shot him in the leg?" Of course this statement displays an ignorance about the reality of fire a gun while under stress and how the power of a firearm is most effectively used to stop an attack.
But the flip-side of this is also true with respect to using a knife in self-defense. A knife can very effectively be used in a non-lethal manner based on the ability to target the weapon for biomechanic cutting. In fact it is MORE effective to incorporate a knife in this manner (biomechanic cutting) versus stabbing center of mass.
"If you are going to use a knife, you do it with the same intent as you use a handgun with. You just target slightly differently."
True but with some important distinctions required.
The same flawed mindset that advocates using a firearm to shoot arms and legs expresses itself in similar fashion when discussing the most effective use of the power of an edged weapon. The most effective use of the one (a firearm to transfer energy into the center of massive of the attacker) does NOT translate into the most effective use of the other. And the most effective use of the one will more then likely also cause death while the effective use of the other will rarely cause a fatal injury.
By KRLY in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
Last Post: June 8th, 2010, 08:10 PM
By paramedic70002 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: October 13th, 2009, 01:35 AM
By wendywc in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: September 13th, 2007, 02:40 PM
By Pete in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: March 11th, 2007, 11:32 PM
By Deke45 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: May 21st, 2005, 08:13 AM
Search tags for this page
bob malvagno bio
left handed reverse edge bowie knife
reverse blade bowie knife
reverse edge bowie
reverse edge bowie knife
reverse edge knife
reverse edge knives
reverse edged bowie knife
reversed edge bowie knife
shivworks disciple for sale
Click on a term to search for related topics.