Firearms, a matter of credibility

Assuming an ideal spherical teenager in vacuum…ok, let’s not. Let’s use this very specific 12 year old in a hypothetical situation of being threatened by something human-like. From the perspective of the predator, which of her weapons would pose the greatest threat to the attacker?

  • Two throwing knives
  • Katana
  • Glock 41

Now, let’s further assume a very well informed goblin who has done his homework on the girl. It knows that she’s fairly experienced with the throwing knives, untrained with the sword and minimally trained with the pistol.

Despite the relative lack of experience with the firearm, she would most likely be considered the hardest prey with it in hand. “She just might get lucky.” With the throwing knives, she has two tries and there’s a possibility that the foe could deflect them or not be incapacitated quickly enough. With the sword, there’s a possibility that she would strike out from inexperience and be disarmed or knocked out. With the pistol…it’s possible to rush her but, with adequate situational awareness, she would have fourteen tries at stopping the foe, starting at considerable range. The power of the hit would be only slightly related to the defender’s strength and agility.

I am not suggesting that pistols are magic wands. They require training for full effectiveness. But even a very slightly trained person would have more of a chance with one in hand than most criminals would find sporting. Guns give credibility to the manifested intent to fight back. That would be true even if she was holding a .22 instead of a .45 — nobody likes getting shot, not even a little bit.

This entry was posted in knife, pistol, rkba, self-defense, weapon and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Firearms, a matter of credibility

  1. Lyle says:

    Nice one!

Comments are closed.