>Police forces across the world dropped them in favour of shitty batons and because they were too effective
Saps are for the most part legal in most of the western world, and were once extremely prevalent across organised crime, law enforcement, and for general personal protection.... I know why they fell out of favour with police, but why did the general public drop the impact weapon? A small leather cosh in your back pocket seems way better for self defence than other things like kubotans, folding knives, etc. Of course a gun is way better but for other scenarios, or being extremely up close and personal, a leather sap still seems king for non gun self defence.
Does anyone have a PDF of this? Also general impact weapon thread, post coshes, saps, black jacks, coin saps, etc etc
Coin saps seem like another genius idea, it's just a wallet/purse until it needs to be something else, and if you take all the coins out it's just a leather pouch, and not any kind of serious impact weapon.
It's a little autistic but you can even loop some around your belt like this,
This one can take a full roll of quarters, which many people already reccomend as some kind of impromtu self defence weapon.
source/dealer?
Barranti Leather Life Changer
Just put a bunch of full soda cans in a pillow case and use that as a melee weapon
yeah lemme just put a few soda cans in my ass for deep conceal
Siswet?
maybe one day i'll be as good as her anon..... :3
half-brick in a sock is objectively the best melee
>objectively the best melee
A halfbrick in a sock literally saved the world once. Can't argue with that.
How fricking old are you, Bad Boy?
They're great if you want to sneak up and knock someone out before you rob them but they're pretty bad for self defense as they offer very little added reach. Also they're widely banned with the same bullshit moral panic laws that ban things like knuckles, switchblades, butterfly knives, etc.
>knock someone out
Reminder there is no safe way to "knock someone out" with blunt force.
Does this actually need to be stated? What next, water is wet?
Every single thread about Saps and Blackjacks, it comes up.
why does it need to be safe?
that information affects both the likelihood of someone trying it, and the punishment if it is attempted.
there's a big difference between wacking someone on the head for him to wake up half an hour later with at most a big bump on the head going "ouchie, hey where's my wallet" (the idea frequently seen on television) and wacking someone on the head inflicting a deadly brain haemorrhage (the reality)
Why would I advocate for stealing people's wallets? This thread is about using these devices in instances where maybe you can't use a gun. Nothing in this thread is about "safe self defence alternatives" if someone is close enough you can whack them with a cosh then it's too late to think about less lethal alternatives.
>but why did the general public drop the impact weapon?
Because the powers that be made them illegal to carry for self-defense, and firearms were already the superior option amyway.
Seems to me that a knife would almost always be a superior weapon to a blackjack.
It really depends. A blackjack will easily knockout a man in an instant if it connects in the head, and break hands, wrists, and forearms too. A knife you can stab for a WHILE before someone loses consciousness due to blood loss, so if the person is suicidal and both of you have knives, you'll probably be stabbed to death alongside that whacko. But most people wont just stand there and trade stabs, the moment you pull out a knife they also keep their distance so in that regard you're probably right.
Still though, if you land that one good swing to the head with a blackjack, I don't think the guy will ever be the same if he even survives the impact. I've tested some quality blackjacks and those things can break husked coconuts without even having to do a full on swing. Husked coconuts are harder than human skulls in comparison.
Well, this is why I carry a gun. Almost anything else that I could practically carry that would be effective is still potentially lethal force, and if I'm going to resort to that I might as well have the best weapon.
I think it goes without saying that guns are better. Anything else is for people who can't carry guns, or who can in general but need to go somewhere they can't. That's not an insignificant niche however.
I can't imagine that a country so cucked that it forbids its citizens going armed would be happy about a criminal being clobbered to death in self-defense. It's a big enough hassle to shoot a person even in America.
Why is it whenever people talk about blackjacks and extendable batons, they imagine them as limb destroying wonderweapons? To the head, sure; you can KO someone. Everything else, good luck pulling that shit off. The bones of a moving, resisting target are harder to bust than you think.
A knife to the neck (carotid) can have someone out in about 10 seconds. Most of the time leading up to that is just them going “wait, huh? I’m bleeding that bad?” More realistically though what knives do is they scare people. You can be outnumbered and still scare like 4 guys away with a knife. A little leather sack full of change, lmao, you are getting stomped the frick out. The knife is like a live grenade. It may not be a perfect weapon by any means, but few people are dumb enough to try to take it from your hands.
They're great as a concealed weapon, but aren't incredibly practical in a fight if you don't have the element of surprise. They have no ability to block or redirect, can easily harm the user if a blow doesn't connect, and have a very limited range considering that they're designed for downward strikes. These factors are not an issue if you are sneaking up behind someone to mug them, but are a serious issue if your opponent is squared up and has a knife or even serious martial arts skills. You have a weapon that needs an overhand grip and force applied to be threatening, which with how short it is, would reduce the range of the hand that is wielding it. The threat of a knife is that it needs ~300 grams of force to break skin through street clothes, making it much more difficult for an assailant to deal with. You do not need a power strike to make use of it, it's easier to use intuitively, it has a longer range since you can jab with it, it can be used in overhand or underhand grip, and it much easier to come up with a non-defense excuse for carrying. Most importantly, someone wielding a knife is immediately more threatening than someone holding a leather pouch, which is the first thing you want in a self defense situation.
>You have a weapon that needs an overhand grip and force applied to be threatening
>and have a very limited range considering that they're designed for downward strikes
they don't though
You guys are sitting here defending what is essentially a cheaper, shittier flail while you shit on flails in every medieval weapon thread. Frick you.
Brick is the only impact weapon I need.
Steels would be better than brass. There should be cut/pierce resistant gloves with flexible encased with steel over knuckles and other joints and any spaces in between with a good grip material surface that's cut/pierce resistant.
There is no reason why there aren't gloves that could easily crack skulls and break cinderblocks. I'm over here snapping construction wood with a light weight bench press bar but my fake steel knuckled gloves dent when they hit any brick but my axe's maul end literally shakes the earth when I shatter cinderblocks and other bricks with it. Doesn't even dent. I have never sharpened the wedge edge for over 10 years of usage and I still split wood and shatter things with my simple overhead strikes. There should be steel knuckles that wont dent from hitting concrete since the metals already exist. Meanwhile I'm cleaving through wood and chipping chunks out of the pavement beneath and my wedge doesn't even have a crack despite the hundreds of chips.