Pole arms and hoplophobes

I wonder why the fans of Markley’s Law don’t annoy the Swiss guardsmen with their helberds or the Japanese history reenactors with spears and naginatas. Seems to me, the users of pole arms are far more appropriate targets for the accusations of compensating for insufficient potency than the users of small handguns.

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

4 Responses to Pole arms and hoplophobes

  1. Bob G says:

    Love the photos, but Gremlin looks somewhat agitated!

    I’m sure you know that the larger the polearm, the more leverage and reach. Halberds, flails and poleaxes had enough reach and leverage to be a real danger to a man-at-arms in full armor. No “compensating” there, just practicality! 🙂

    Here in south Texas in summer, almost no one carries a large pistol. Small, single-stack 9mm pistols abound, along with .32 and .380 autopistols, or .38 revolvers. Pocket carry is common during our sweaty summers, as a cover garment often is problematic. No “compensating” here, either! 🙂

    I love your photos and your insights and read your blog every day!


    • Lyle says:

      It’s 98-100 degrees here at the moment and I’m carrying a large frame pistol. It’s not a puzzle.

  2. Lyle says:

    Well I think you know the answer very well, my friend; the owners of ancient battle weapons aren’t attacked as much because those aren’t the weapons that a criminal or tyrant (but I repeat myself) fears. Their thugs can deal with occasional sword or pole arm, whereas a major percentage of the population armed with modern firearms is rather more of a problem for the servants of evil. There’s no point in being coy about it, is there?

  3. BillCa says:

    A common theme with leftists is usually expressed in their ignorance and fear of mental instability. “But what if your gun-toting school teacher just snaps and starts shooting up the school!? ”

    “Snap” is their favorite term regarding people who kill others. People don’t wake up perfectly normal and functional in the morning then suddenly “snap” and turn into homicidal maniacs right after lunch. But try to tell that to a leftist liberal and they’ll point out media sources quoting others saying “We never saw that coming…” or “I never thought he was capable of something like this…” and, of course, “He was a nice enough guy but he kept to himself…”

    Sure none of those people saw it or expected it. Why would you even consider one of your neighbors or coworkers capable of multiple murders? People don’t look for signs of instability in others unless something odd stands out. And in our hectic daily lives, who even takes the time to think about a mere acquaintance in depth? We often insulate ourselves from the problems of our coworkers and friends because we don’t want to get sucked in to their dramas. But if you say there are some people you keep an eye on, why then you’re “paranoid.”

    We’re called paranoid for carrying a gun. Meanwhile the leftists see don’t see their own paranoia in their rabid fear of a peaceable person with a safely holstered pistol on their hip. Such a sight, to them, is one of impending doom. “Why would you carry a gun around if you didn’t plan to kill someone?” they whine. Their own ignorance and paranoia requires them to believe the only purpose of a gun is to kill and anyone with a gun must therefore have murder on his mind.

Comments are closed.