[Sam Barris]

“A properly balanced sword is the most versatile weapon for close quarters ever devised. Pistols and guns are all offensive, no defense; close on him fast and a man with a gun can't shoot, he has to stop you before you reach him. Close on a man carrying a blade and you'll be spitted like a roast pigeon--unless you have a blade and can use it better than he can.
A sword never jams, never has to be reloaded, is always ready. Its worst shortcoming is that it takes great skill and patient, loving practice to gain that skill; it can't be taught to raw recruits in weeks, nor even months.”

“Glory Road”
--Robert Heinlein

[Patrick Kelly]

Inspired or deluded depending on your point of view.

I've been charged by someone with an edged weapon and I've been shot at by someone armed with a gun. I highly suspect Mr. Heinlein never experienced either.

I'll take the gun.

[Jean Thibodeau]

From the video I saw about surviving edged weapons inside 21 feet is the danger zone within which the advantages of a gun over and edged weapon is far from guaranteed. Even worse if the gun must be drawn from a holster and you were in condition white ( Day dreaming ! )

Using obstructions between you and the knife wielder and / or moving laterally rather than trying to back out of range was recommended. Also a baton or large maglight might be a better choice when in spitting range than standing still while trying to pull your gun out and not keeping your eyes on the attacker.

Naturally I'm talking from theoretical NON- EXPERIENCE as opposed to Patrick

If you survive the initial surprise and get out of the direct line of attack shielding yourself from the blade with the previously mentioned objects ( Even a sturdy clipboard might do ) you can then empty the gun into the ******** ( Expletive of your choice ! )

Oh, and I imagine being shot at is no fun at all.

[Aaron Schnatterly]

[Elling Polden]

Guns guns guns, all the way.
Unlike Heinleins theory, a man in close combat can shoot you a lot easier than he can stab or slice you. He only needs to turn his wrist in your direction, and pull the trigger. Something he can still do even when you are holding his arm, or even wrist. This is not posible with a blade.

There is a reason the sword disapears from the field of battle within a few decades of the apperance of automatic firearms.

[Sam Barris]

[Steve Fabert]

I think the Heinlein quote is from the early 60s, a period when he was experimenting with hallucinogens a lot.

I am not aware of any defense that a sword or knife can offer against any form of gunshot (or arrow or crossbow bolt, for that matter). It would be nice if a gun could protect you from bullets, but it can't, just as a sword can't.

A bit of body armor and a reliable firearm is the only rational choice. Sharp weapons are still good for sneak attacks, but the chivalric use of blades ended when reliable firearms came into use.

[Anton de Vries]

[Steve Fabert]

[Patrick Kelly]

[Steve Fabert]

Patrick, you are surely correct when you point out that the weapon itself does not win the fight, whether it's in its holster/scabbard or not. As I recall the comment attributed to the legendary Mr. Hickock, it's not the man who draws first, but the man who can draw, aim, and put a bullet where it counts, who wins the fight. Holding a weapon is not the same as using it instantly. The decision to do the deed must also be made.

[Don Stanko]

Lets face it, there are really two factors that are important here, training and reaction time. True, in "Surviving Edged Weapons" they proved that the reaction time of an officer against an edged weapon is 21 feet. But this is taking into account that the officer was at the disadvantage, not expecting the attack. This is how most officer encounters are, we are primarily reacting to an immediate threat. If those officers were at low ready or aiming at the suspect, most would come out on top.

If you take two people, one armed with an edged weapon and one armed with a reliable firearm, both with equal training and ability, with more than a three foot gap the firearm will come out on top. Three feet or less, its a toss up. This has been the result in every training scenario I have run, witnessed or been involved in.

[James Holczer]

As much as I am an incurable romantic and I love my bladed weapons. I'll take my 40 S&W Browning hi-power in a scrap anytime over all of my swords. But lets not forget that it's not the weapon that wins fights. Its the individual behind the weapon. Training and above all mindset have a huge roll to play in close quarters combat. If your not willing to do what you have to do during a fight, then it doesn't really matter what your packing.

[David R. Glier]

Indeed. Swords -as we think of them- are useless in (almost) all modern combat. I'll take my 1911 over ANY bladed weapon, ANY day. If it was between a sword and a Baretta I might think about it a little bit, but I'd grumble and take the 9mil.

However, I firmly believe that bladed weapons somewhere between the "big bowie" and "short sword" size have a definate place in combat today, and that place is as a close-quarters weapon when combatants are using long-arms. When your good hand is occupied with a rifle, espeicialy one of the Stoner variants that we keep loading with more and more gear (grenade launchers, shotguns, holosights, scopes, flashlights, range finders....) you've effectively removed half of your body from a fight -the same half of your body that holds your sidearm. The pistol is flawed as a backup close-quarters weapon.

I've said for about four years now that short weapon with a broad, heavy blade between 10 and 15 inches, that can be drawn from a quickdraw sheath with the off hand would be HIGHLY useful in a situation where a solder or Marine is jumped in a combat situation -even if only to beat the attacker back to a distance where the longarm can be used to make the kill. The Ka-Bar, fine old standard that it is, isn't big or heavy enough to render a lethal threat from an off-hand swipe, and machetes are much too light and much too long to draw quickly. The Fairbarin Smatchet would be a good start, but could certainly be improved upon.

The Marine instructors in my NROTC program seemed to think the idea had some merit. I'd be interested in what our old solders here have to say about it. Comments or criticism?

[Eric McHugh]

[Roger Hooper]

[David R. Glier]

Even shorter than a Gladius or (most) Katzbalgers. I'm thinking more along the lines of a long Pugio, a short Cinqueda or the short Spartan Xyphos. The "Odysseus Sword", the broad, multi-ridged bronze slashing sword that Albion used to sell is just about exactly what I have in mind -in steel, of course. (does anyone have a picture of it? They discontinued it before I could get it...)

Something about fifteen to eighteen inches in total length -certainly no more than twenty inches, because it gets too slow to draw- with a blade of twelve to fourteen inches in length by a good two inches in width.

[Sam Barris]

[Steve Grisetti]

[Don Stanko]

Hey Sam, I just thought of a modern example where edged weapons are just as useful as firearms. In South Africa, the officers are taught to use a knife in conjuction with a firearm. You see, over there when an officer pulls his weapon on a suspect, many times an onlooker will charge the officer from behind or from the side in an attempt to take the firearm so it can be sold at a later date. This has become such a problem that the police academy has developed a shooting stance where the off hand is holding a knife, just underneath the hand holding the firearm (much like a police officer might hold a flashlight in the US). If anybody comes close the officer would slash at the suprise attacker, protecting his weapon. Also, in India if a recruit fails his firearms qualifications, he is armed with a machete instead. So, there are parts of the world today where edged weapons are still favored!!!