/k/ - Weapons

You can carry a sword openly in Texas now, not that anyone will.

It's just not practical and learning to use it properly takes time. To the untrained, a sword is dangerous and unwieldy.

>>543736

What is the context here? Knives are used in a military as tools. For a civilian, carrying a sword is illegal in most places, so it's only good as home defence. But in most places with good home defence laws you can get guns too.

With all that said, I think the Japs kind of had the right idea with issuing shitty mass produced swords to their officers to make them feel more like an officer. I think it could be brought back for ceremonial purposes, and officers should have the option to bring them to actual battle, if they want a hump of metal on their side that they won't use for anything.

>>543738

i am talking about using it for self defense. in germany you are not allowed to carry around a baseball bat, but there are people who still get them for selfdefense at home, some also carry knives for self defense even when its illegal to do so

i was just wondering what would make a baseball bat more effective than a sword, legal or not doesnt matter right now

>>543736

Because knives are better. You do not need a sword unless you are facing someone else with a sword. The last school stabbing in russia was commited with 2 knifes. You do not even need a gun, just go in and stab people. And they did not even kill themselves, true brave men.

I am not propaganding school stabbings, just saying that there is nothing wrong with knifes.

Because swords require training to use properly. You can't simply pickup a sword cutlasses and machetes excluded and use it effectively. The reason why clubs are useful is because any idiot can pick one up and use it. The are also field expedient. Think chair legs and poles. Knives are useful because the two most common attacks (slash and stab) are easy to perform and can do a lot of damage in the hands of the average criminal.

In short, bats and knives are easier to acquire and use competently when compared to most swords. Knives can also be used as multipurpose tools.

It's like open carrying an AR vs conceal carrying a CZ. Or in home defense atleast in murricuh you can get a nog goodifier in the form of a Mossberg scatter gat for less than 300. Meanwhile a sword that is not some chink pot metal or purely for decoration will require some research and knowledge of where to get it, and the price for the "battle ready" stuff from kult of athena can be 300 or more. So instead of buying a sword I can go bean nigger and buy a properly made genuine huezillian machete for 20 or if I want people to know I spatter brains I'll buy a 60 or more dollar hardwood american classic and bash gook nigger heads while laughing.

>>543736

Because countries that ban guns ban self-defense together with it too. Knives and bats are used as tools that are lying around or along the similar lines of plausible deniability. Or as illegal concealable weapons. Swords are not tools and are not concealable. In the end all comes to the legality and there are no laws that permit self-defence with swords. And where laws permit such use laws also permit better alternatives (guns).

>>543736

Swords are actually pretty difficult to use without a lot of practice.

Maces on the other hand can be used by any old idiot and are top-tier in general.

A quality sword costs about a thousand US dollars. Also, if you kill a home invader with a fucking sword or other dedicated melee weapon with no other use, you are more likely to be persecuted in a country which would prohibit guns for self defense.

>>543736

Because who could possibly suspect a knife-wielding man in a dumpster ready to perform figure 8s to the face?

>>543768

>Memeaces.

>Not using a Lucerne Hammer.

>Not wanting a 7ft pole with a hammer, hook, and spear on the end.

>Not even wanting a good, old-fashioned, English Bill; or even a Glaive-Guisarme or Guisarme-Glaive.

If you're not enough of a Chad to join the Pole-Arm Master Race then at least use a Falx or something with a little more reach than your 'itty bitty hitty stick'.

>weebshit

>too lazy to type properly

>asking a stupid question

>>543794

A full pole-arm is a bastard to carry around all day. You could conceivably carry a reasonably sized mace somewhat comfortably (perhaps strapped to a leg).

Perhaps if I was concerned about horsemen things would be different.

>>543739

>some also carry knives for self defense even when its illegal to do so

It's not illegal. Stop spreading false information.

>>543933

Wat are German knife laws? Short version?

>>543947

Most important German law is available for free online, they even have translated versions.

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_waffg/englisch_waffg.html#p0801

Waffen Gesetz Annex 1. Part 2, section 1.4.1 through 1.4.3:

See appendex 2 Part 1:

>1.4.1 Flick knives and gravity knives in accordance with Annex 1, Part 1, Chapter 2, nos. 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. Sentence 1 shall not apply to flick knives in which the blade springs out of the side of the grip and the part of the blade which projects from the grip

>– is no more than 8.5 cm long,

>– is not honed on both sides;

>1.4.2 fist knives in accordance with Annex 1, Part 1, Chapter 2, no. 2.1.3,

>1.4.3 butterfly knives in accordance with Annex 1, Part 1, Chapter 2, no. 2.1.4,

So basically:

You can have folding knives with blades no longer than 8.5mm, and not sharped on both sides, or non-folding knives such as kitchen knives. You can carry them anywhere you want to, but keep in mind: you are not allowed to bring them to public events, such as festivals or anything like that.

Section 42:

>Section 42

>Ban on carrying weapons at public events

>(1) Anyone who takes part in public entertainment, festivals, sporting events, trade fairs, exhibitions, markets or similar public events may not carry weapons as defined in Section 1 (2).

>(2) The competent authorities may grant general or specific exemptions to subsection 1 if

>1. the applicant has the necessary reliability (Section 5) and personal aptitude (Section 6),

>2. the applicant has proven that he cannot do without the weapon at the public event, and

>3. there is no reason to fear any threat to public security or order.

>(3) Section 38 notwithstanding, persons authorized under subsection 2 must also carry the exemption notice with them and present it for examination on request.

>(4) Subsections 1 through 3 shall not apply

>1. to persons taking part in theatrical or similar performances and for this purpose carrying unloaded guns or guns loaded with shell ammunition or weapons as defined in Section 1 (2) no. 2,

>2. to shooting on shooting ranges (Section 27),

>3. where a shooting licence has been obtained in accordance with Section 10 (5),

>4. to commercial displays of the weapons referred to in subsection 1 at trade fairs and exhibitions.

>(5) The Land governments shall be authorized to enact statutory instruments stipulating that carrying weapons within the meaning of Section 1 (2) may be prohibited or restricted as a general rule or in individual cases on certain public roads, streets or pathways or in certain public places where

>1. criminal offences using weapons or

>2. robberies, bodily harm, threats, intimidation, sexual offences, unlawful deprivations of liberty or criminal acts against life

>have been committed repeatedly and where there is reason to assume that such criminal offences will continue to occur in the future. The statutory instrument pursuant to sentence 1 shall stipulate that the competent authorities may permit exemptions as a general rule or in individual cases, in particular for holders of weapons licences, local residents and persons engaged in a trade or business, provided that there is no reason to fear any threat to public security. Subsection 3 shall apply accordingly in cases covered by sentence 2. The Land governments may delegate their authority under sentence 1 in conjunction with sentence 2 to the competent supreme Land authority by way of statutory instrument; the latter may further delegate this authority by way of statutory instrument.

Knives don't require a license, so you can carry them anywhere except festivals or trade shows (think of something like shotshow), unless you want to present them there.

Section 1(2) is mentioned in the first sentence, and I believe it's important to understand.

(cont)

>>543954

Section 1, subsection 2:

>(2) Weapons shall mean

>1. guns or equivalent objects and

>2. portable objects

>a) which are by nature intended to remove or reduce humans` ability to attack or defend, in particular cutting weapons and thrust weapons;

>b) which, due to their properties, method of operation or how they work, are able to remove or reduce humans` ability to attack or defend, even if not intended for that purpose, and are referred to in this Act.

So basically, carrying a razor sharp pocket knife is OK, as are kitchen knives or a multi-tool/ "survival" knife.

Carrying a bayonet however isn't allowed, since it's main purpose is to fight. The law is very open on this part, but that doesn't mean that carrying pepper spray or tazers is forbidden. They are explicitly allowed as long as they have been proven not permanently harmful to humans.

See: 1.3.5 and 1.3.6 in Annex 2 part 1, Banned weapons:

>1.3.5 objects containing irritants or other active substances, unless the substances are officially licensed as harmless to health and the objects

>– are of limited range and spray for a limited duration and

>– carry an official test mark to prove that they are harmless to health and that the range and

>spray duration is limited,

>1.3.6 Objects which inflict injury using energy other than mechanical energy generated by bodily movement (e. g. electric shock devices), where they are not officially licensed as harmless to health and carry an official test mark to prove that they are harmless to health, and remote electric pulse devices which transmit an electric pulse together with the firing or triggering device via a conductive jet of fluid or which transmit an electric pulse to the body via wired electrodes,

Also: no nunchucks, or throwing stars, and no laser pointers/night vision optics on your funs!

>1.3.3 star-shaped discs designed for throwing at a target and inflicting injury (throwing stars),

>1.3.8 objects which designed or handled so as to inflict injury by choking (e. g. nunchakus);

>1.2.4 devices for guns

>1.2.4.1 to illuminate the target (e. g. target spotlights) or mark the target (e. g. lasers or sighting point projections),

>1.2.4.2 night-vision devices and night-target devices with fittings for guns and night-vision targeting attachments (e. g. telescopic sights), where these items have an image converter or electronic intensifier,

Also no weapons (knives, batons, or guns) that can pass for common devices, such as canes, brief cases, or a book.

>>543913

>A full pole-arm is a bastard to carry around all day

Manlet detected.

>Perhaps if I was concerned about horsemen things would be different.

Fucking city-boys need to get off /k/ and go back to fluffing Mohammedan rape gangs.

>>543933

>It's not illegal. Stop spreading false information.

My proxy aside, good luck ever justifying self defense with a knife infront of our fucked up courts, even if you were outnumbered 4 to 1 and every single one of your attackers was carrying a knife aswell, they'd still find some bullshit ot charge you with. As you said, carrying a knife isn't illegal, but the police will still give you shit for it if they find one with you and the courts will treat you like a violent criminal even if you just used it as a last line of self defense.

>>544106

>ever justifying self defense

You don't need to. It's not illegal to carry a knife outside, as long as the knife itself isn't illegal.

On top of that: Bügerliches Gesetzbuch Abschnitt 6: §227

>(1) An act required for self-defence is not unlawful.

>(2) Self-defence is the defence required to ward off a present unlawful assault on oneself or another.

Learn 2 lawyer.

Same reason why AR15 is not used in crimes, much.

It's much harder to conceal a sword than a knife.

You don't look threatening with a baseball bat.

Machete crime is all over the places in the 3rd world though, so it really comes down to how shitty your society is.

>>544135

>learn 2 lawyer

>implying our court system gives a fuck

if they decided that you used disproportionate force to ward of an attack they can quickly drop the self defense pretense because ozan, ömur and their three cousins obviously weren't really threatening your life when they chased you through the underpass at 1am and charge you with some bullshit. Especially if your knife looks even the slightest bit too threatening or if they found out that you have some sort of self defense training. A knife will quickly get you in legal troubles, even though in itself it isn't illegal to carry it, I'd not advise against carrying one if you live in a bad neighborhood, but better not trust in the courts to simply let you off if you were forced to use it.

>>544138

Even then, machete could just be shit piece of sharpened metal.

>>544176

spoiler: its not a crime if they dont catch you. its surprising how many murder cases go unsolved.

>>544488

With cameras everywhere they will catch defending side. Who not gonna wear hoodie with mask 24/7. Unlike people who planned to assault him.

>>544541

>not changing surface layer clothing after passing a surveilance cam

>not wearing sunglasses and a basecap at every time of the day

>not proactivley grating off your fingerprints

>not carrying a pack of hairdye to quickly change your haircolour at the next public fountain

>not wearing a reserve ghilly underneath to quickly go inawoods at the nearest public park for a couple of months

>not opearting every single second of your live, especially while being asleep

If you don't prepare for the consequences of a preemptive self-defense scenario at any given moment, against every single person you see, stranger or friend alike, you might as well cut a large hole in the back of your pants, because either muhammad or some jewish lawyer is guaranteed to fuck you up the ass.

>>544541

not if you run away to kazahstan

come home white men

>>544658

Is it weird that I have unironically considered this?

>Almost all the Stans north of Afghanistan already have hardy European diaspora from the many gulags

>They live more traditional lives

>They are less wealthy, but despite living in majority Muslim countries are still less cucked than they would be in Europe

>Unironically the future home for the white man

Why would anyone want to carry around a heavy as fuck sword when they could just, not? If you wanted to carry around something purely for self defense why not just get a spear, put a big cover on the tip, and use it as a walking stick? At least the spear would make you comfy rather than just be a bother. Additionally it would be way easier to use and better for self defense in most situations.

>>544694

>this is what RT burger watchers believe

Stans have real racism. From the fall of USSR non Asians were steadily persecuted and their numbers are steadily falling. People of non primary ethnicity have zero representation in the government structures, with 100% corrupt societies it means zero prospects in life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwPOxcGw3Dc

>>544738

why were swords the go-to sidearm for centuries? they offer the most flexibility out of any weapon light enough to carry all day or when you travel. spears and similar weapons are fairly situational, unless you have something like a short asegai. spears are best used in a group, otherwise theres a significant risk of your opponent rushing inside your effective range. the sword helps mitigate this by being sharp along its entire length. another handy option is a billy club or similar, but that has the disadvantage of requiring significant force to cause damage, whereas a sword can cut with relatively little force. its not the best option for every situation, but its the only option that somewhat covers most situations.

A sword actually require some pretty good skill to be used effectively and do anything else than bruises and superficial cuts.

You need a square angle and good positionning.

Meanwhile, smashing things with a club is one of the first thing a toddler do, and only require some anger to be used effectively.

And everyone had a knife in hand since they have teeth, so even if they suck at using them in combat, it just feels natural.

The better question is why no one in noguns country use a spear for home defense.

It's the second best weapon for a beginner (after the club) and the best choice for locking an opponent in a corridor or a doorway.

>>544844

yeah, in a defendable position like a hallway spears are better in most ways than a sword, but out on the road, you want something that you can easily handle and quickly turn to engage another target. in saying all i did about swords, i did assume that anyone carrying one would have at least some training in its use. without training, a club is the better option, maybe a long knife.

>>543756

>metal baseball bat

>good

dumbass.

>>544844

>The better question is why no one in noguns country use a spear for home defense

Same reason they don't use swords. It is illegal.

>>545108

fill with concrete :)

>>544844

> why no one in noguns country use a spear for home defense

BREAKING NEWS

>A deranged far-right weapons fetishist has been arrested after criminally wounding a young man.

>Police have not released information on the victim, but off the record sources suggest he is from a protected minority group and was breaking into the violent bigots house at the time.

>Our sources also suggest that the victim was a good boy who was just getting his life on track, intended to train as a doctor, and definitely did not do anything

>The soon to be convicted neonazi wounded the poor, 32 year old, child with a spear, a weapon favoured by sexists for it's phallic shape.

>The judge has yet to be chosen for the court case, but The Right Hon Stacey J. Williams has informed us that the evil altrighter will be convicted, and given the maximum sentence allowed by the law.

>A number of publicly minded politicians are now calling for the government to require licenses for private ownership of opposable thumbs.

This is why nofuns /k/ommandos don't have boar spears, partisans, or war-scythes stored at carefully determined locations, within easy reach, around their homes.

Still, nice dubs m8.

>>544135

is it really considered self defense in German courts if the person defending themselves is an ethnic German?

>>545161

>a sword weights easily over 2 Kg

Dead wrong. The heaviest of two-handed swords were a bit over 2kg, and the lightest of small-swords were around 450g.

>>545268

For swords that saw frequent use? No, I'm not. Of course there are outliers, and I could have been clearer in what I meant, but swords are far lighter than almost everyone thinks them to be.

Rough, average weights:

>European "longswords": 3 to 3.5lbs (1.36 to 1.58kg), which is heavy for one-handed swords

>Large European longswords: 5 to 6lbs (2.27 to 2.72kg)

>Greatswords, spadoni, zweihander: 5 to 8lbs (2.27 to 3.63kg)

>European medieval one-handed swords: 2 to 2.5lbs (0.91 to 1.13kg)

>"Rapiers": ~2.5lbs (~1.13kg)

>Tulwars: 2 to 2.5lbs (0.91 to 1.13kg), which is supposedly heavy for Indian swords

>Katanas: 2 to 2.5lbs (0.91 to 1.13kg)

>17-19th century European sabres: 2 to 2.5lbs (0.91 to 1.13kg)

>>543736

People nowadays have a proclivity for taking the easy and therefore unmanly approach to combat. Swords are tools of the strong. Only quivering weaklings complain about it's weight or having to work hard to become skilled with it. In essence today's breed is weaker than the ancient men who killed with their bare hands in close combat.

Not all heroes wear capes, and in a no-guns no fun area I'd support it. For instance, in California there are no rules against standing your ground, and no blade length bans on unconcealed weapons. So you could totally kill a man with a sword if you had the right case.

>>545308

>Swords are tools of the strong. Only quivering weaklings complain about it's weight

But the vast majority of swords weighed less than 2kg. Scroll up. They are the physically easiest non-firearm weapon to use. Bows are the "tools of the strong".

>>546441

>They are the physically easiest non-firearm weapon to use

That title would go to spears; moving a sword around properly is more tiring than you'd think.

>>546441

I'd argue that clubs, maces, mauls, warhammers etc are the weapons of the strong, as they can only cause damage through the energy you put behind them. Swords & edged weapons in general can cause damage from relatively gentle contact (compared to a mace for eg). Considering the amount of training and practice needed to hit a target with a bow, or even draw a properly built longbow, they would be the weapons of the most autistic nutters, obsessed with performance over efficiency and practicality.

>>546452

To my knowledge, individual bowmen didn't need to be particularly skilled, considering they were usually firing in volleys. The training was more for becoming proficient with a heavier poundage, not necessarily accuracy.

heavy

hard to use

useless against anything above 10m, might as well pull up the gun or pull out a knife which is light, small and far more multifunctional on the field

ask stupid questions get stupid answers, anime posters are retarded and a disease

>>546441

>Bows are the "tools of the strong".

But the vast majority of bows weighed less than 2kg. Google it. They are physically easiest non-firearm weapon to use. Crossbows are the "tools of the strong".

>>546468

Maybe you should drink more milk.

>>546494

>drink more milk.

that's not an argument for carrying something that weighs a kilogram because it looks cool, most soldiers will throw that garbage away and keep their knives since a sword isn't something that will be used in any reasonable amount in combat and has no practical purpose for normal day to day tasks like a knife is which you both need and want to keep to do basically anything

>>546467

Except that if you're firing several hundred arrows a week, you'll certainly grow the muscles you need to pull the string back, but you'll also get more and more accurate simply through practice.

>>546494

Except that the upper body strength you need to use a warbow at all, let alone for several shots a minute for the length of a battle is significantly more than you'll need to work the crank mechanism the heavier crossbows were fitted with.

>>546499

it doesnt break that often compared to wood

it is a big problem tbh

>>546501

Except you're wrong.

>>546497

So, what you're saying is your arms are too weak to lift 2.20462262lbs?

>>546505

Except that you have no idea what you're talking about

>>546508

Except you're still wrong.

>>546517

Why are you insulting him by implying he is one of the Bog bros?

>>546521

Burgers are Burgers.

>>546501

>Except that if you're firing several hundred arrows a week, you'll certainly grow the muscles you need to pull the string back, but you'll also get more and more accurate simply through practice.

How does that change the fact that individual accuracy wasn't as important as people think?

>>546660

>individual accuracy wasn't as important as people think?

How does that change the fact that individual longbowmen would have been significantly more accurate than you imply?

>>546669

>significantly more accurate than you imply?

I didn't say they were or weren't, I said that they didn't need to be, considering the way in which they were usually employed.

In >>546452, you said:

>Considering the amount of training and practice needed to hit a target with a bow, or even draw a properly built longbow, they would be the weapons of the most autistic nutters, obsessed with performance over efficiency and practicality.

This can be immediately seen to be bullshit by anyone with even a cursory knowledge of historical warfare, so in >>546467

I responded with:

>The training was more for becoming proficient with a heavier poundage, not necessarily accuracy.

You can be incredibly proficient with a bow of light poundage, but on a battlefield you'll also be completely useless.

>>546505

>lol yeah let's just carry 2.20462262lbs extra for no reason for shit we won't even use

spergook tier

>>546739

>He isn't even white

Perfect.

>>546717

I believe the idea is for it to be used by civilians as OP implies this when he brings up baseball bats and knifes. Unless we live in Quinton Tarantino-land neither of those weapons are used openly by soldiers in combat anyways. If it's a civilian then you damn well can carry what you want on your body within reason.

I don't know why people don't carry swords anymore. I might start since it's legal in my state. I really think a sword carries with it the element of surprise. If you remember Kairo Seijuro he managed to spook 3 people out of a fist fight by threatening to kill them with a sword, but a sword was so memey that nobody flipped out about it compared to- if he had drawn a gun. That said, it's a bit bulkier than a knife without offering much more versatility than a knife beyond the reach.

>>546983

Ever post so early in the morning you forget if you've already posted in a thread? Fuck me mate.

>>546717

>we

Scroll up retard. This isn't a military context being described because OP clearly says so >>543739 ==Self Defense==

>>546517

Chopping someone up to death with a sword is much more physically demanding than poking holes in their chest with arrows.

>>546964

i would be nervous about taking an existing sword pattern and just swapping a lighter alloy in, mainly because most swords are the "correct" weight for their design. taking weight away from a sword like that may not reduce cuting power but alot of saber cuts are infact chops which would suffer.

In regards to having ultra long french style bayonets, sure you could have that and yes you could make it a sabre too, but why. if you want to swing the rifle around like that then why not a bayon-axe or bayon-hammer.

>>547169

Weight concerns. If you had a bayon-hammer or bayo-axe it'd weigh a ton. If you wanted a super rridiculous bayonet you could just reinforce the stock with spikes and use it as a hammer, or carry around an affixment the size of your leg.