Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If you've ever handled a fire axe, you'd realize it makes a lousy weapon. It has a long handle, with a heavy head. The idea is it can build up a lot of momentum to crash through things like doors and walls.

But the long handle makes it difficult to swing in a melee, and slow to swing, and once the swing starts it will be very hard to change its arc. Hence, your target can easily sidestep it. I suppose it would be good against plate armor, but not many villains wear plate armor these days. You also have to be careful with a fire axe to not chop your foot if you miss. I don't think I've ever seen a war axe/hatchet/tomahawk anywhere near that size.

For self-defense in close quarters, a baseball bat is ideal.

P.S. I am no martial arts expert.



>For self-defense in close quarters, a baseball bat is ideal.

Wielding a baseball bat, you have to constantly worry about the opponent's getting his hands on the bat and wrestling it away from you: a screwdriver is better.


"For self-defense in close quarters, a baseball bat is ideal."

Eh, not really. That's still a lot of unbalanced mass and potentially excessive length. There's a reason batons and other strike weapons aren't made like bats.


The best close quarter weapon, of course, is a (potentially illegally) sawed-off shotgun.

The second best is something that you've extensively practiced with, and designed for the purpose.


A gun is a terrible close quarters weapon. A gun is so good at long range that you can typically ensure you never get into a close quarters fight, but once it becomes close quarters you want something else. (with a gun you do have to keep the muzzle pointed away from you - but one hit with the bat will damage the barrel enough that it isn't safe to fire)


Aren't batons made to not produce serious injury? I.e. they're meant to coerce.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: