On Freddie Gray’s knife
The Baltimore Sun reports that an investigative Task Force of the Baltimore Police Department has found that, contrary to the assertion by prosecutor Marilyn Mosby, Freddie Gray’s knife was illegal (just as the arresting police had claimed):
While Mosby said Friday that the officers had made an illegal arrest because a knife Gray was carrying was not a “switchblade,” a violation of state law, the police task force studied the knife and determined it was “spring-assisted,” which does violate a Baltimore code [§59-22].
Details, details.
According to attorney Andrew Branca of Legal Insurrection:
The organized Task Force composed of senior department officers with access to specialized knowledge and the opportunity to examine the knife in complete safety and at their leisure concluded, as the arresting officers had, that the knife was unlawful. That makes laughable any argument that the officer’s own conclusion under stress to that effect was unreasonable on its face.
And if the arresting officers perception of probable cause for the arrest was not unreasonable, the arrest was not unlawful. Period…
Now Marc Zayon, Officer Nero’s attorney, is seeking an independent examination of the knife recovered from Gray at his arrest.
Branca’s entire piece is well worth reading; it contains much much more, and is fairly shocking (even at this point, when we shouldn’t be at all shocked) in its revelations about the scarcity of evidence for the charges against Officer Nero. Branca adds:
There never seemed to be much of an evidentiary basis for the more serious criminal charges brought by Mosby against the officers”“the second degree depraved heart murder and the multiple counts of manslaughter, in particular. Thus Mosby’s charges were always exceedingly vulnerable from “the top.”
Now it seems that even the lesser charges may lack even the minimal evidentiary basis to survive a probable cause hearing that due process demands the officers be entitled to, making Mosby’s charges vulnerable from “the bottom.”
I wonder whether Mosby may end up regretting not having taken a little more time to think this through. Yes, I know her charges were politically motivated and time was of the essence, but I doubt she wanted to make herself look like a bumbling fool.
And then there’s this:
When charges were announced Friday against Alicia White for the death of Freddie Gray, her phone started buzzing from journalists and bail bondsmen.
The problem was, they were calling the wrong Alicia White. The elementary school cafeteria manager from East Baltimore was not the Baltimore Police sergeant charged with manslaughter in the high-profile police custody death – even though court records listed her…
“The middle initial was off. Her address, her height, her weight, her driver’s license number – all of the information was my client’s information,” said Jeremy Eldridge, an attorney who says he has been hired by the resident.
“Her life has been a living hell the past four days…”
Alicia White wasn’t the only one, either:
An attorney for Lt. Brian Rice said his client’s information was also entered incorrectly when prosecutors filed charges, but declined further comment.
On Friday evening, Tammy and Brian Rice of Brunswick, Md. said they were receiving multiple calls from reporters looking for the lieutenant. Brian Rice of Brunswick is a plumber, they said.
Heck of a job, Mosby, heck of a job.
Are there any competent dem women in positions of power?
Mosby claimed the knife was legal under Maryland law. Did it occur to her to check Baltimore law? Given the event occurred in Baltimore with Baltimore police officers, that might have been prudent.
I still fear this is a Nifong prosecution or reverse OJ. The cops are getting hosed.
Are there any competent dem[s] in positions of power? Fixed.
No.
” but I doubt she wanted to make herself look like a bumbling fool.”
Bumbling fools have great difficulty looking like anything but a bumbling fool.
The game is to play on ignorance..
1. he ran away and running away is not illegal – except for the supreme court which said that in bad areas it is allowed to stop someone running away
2. that the knife was not illegal – except that they are not applying the standards for a parolee but the standards for a common person.
Usually people who are on parole are not allowed the same things that people who have not committed crimes under the idea that they are still sort of incarcerated… that is, a parolee is not a person who finished serving their time, they are a criminal who is still serving time by living under the parole restrictions, which when the term is over, they THEN revert to citizen status (and not on everything depending on their offence and other issues)
ack… the bold was supposed to stop under the ANY dangerous weapon clause… ie. the lenght of the knife does not matter when its a parolee..
Heck of a job,Mosby? Yes, of course.
What is not accepted by many on the Right is that our thinking, our reasoning, our morality are totally inoperative for the Left.
Analogy: they read the koran (why capitalize?) and we read the New Testament.
So Mosby is by their standards doing a great job. She and her councilman husband are both on the great Leftist escalator to stardom, ever higher and higher. She is light-skinned to boot, highly prized in black females.
Nifong was brought down only by zealous defense attorneys and, eventually, the State Attorney General and the NC Bar. I bet with confidence that will not happen in MD. The cops’ defense team may win acquittals, but that is all. May win …MAY.
Still no one can say when and how this guys neck was broken. I don’t see how a jury can convict without a very reasonable answer to those questions.
Harold
they will do so under the idea that once in custody, the police are responsible for what happens regardless if you can work out what happens…
Here’s the thing. The thing, other than gross stupidity and incompetence that explains the Democrat behavior is that they are doing everything they can to fan the flames.
Either these people are as stupid as potted plants (and that’s an insult to potted plants) or this is all just more orchestration of racial unrest contrived to look like incompetence.
Of course, if it really is just plain stupidity (which is certainly possible), then the civil unrest is just a bonus. Regardless, the prosecutor’s job is safe.
Karl Marx is laughing from Hell.
As Instapundit points out, if the prosecutors don’t actually know whether Freddie Gray’s knife was illegal, how was Freddie Gray supposed to know?
Also, as Instapundit points out, in pretty much every red state it’s easy for anyone to know whether their knife is legal, because all knives are legal.
ConceptJunkie,
It is stupidity and incompetence in service of the ongoing campaign and orchestration of racial unrest by the Left and their liberal “useful idiots”. Racial strife = increased votes by their base, which in turn translates into career promotion for the mob’s ‘agents provocateurs’.
Does anyone know exactly which officers were in the van as it was being driven?
Yes, I know her charges were politically motivated and time was of the essence, but I doubt she wanted to make herself look like a bumbling fool.
Why was time of the essence? Because the Mayor, having declined to crack down on lawless demonstrators, wanted to Give Them What They Want ™ to get them to stop rioting?
That is the opposite of doing her job. As such, she deserves to look like a bumbling fool… and she’s earned it fair and square. She truly has no one to blame but herself.
Daniel:
Agreed. “Time was of the essence” for political reasons. She wanted something to offer the crowd to calm them down.
Neo, why exactly did Herronner want to calm them down? How do we know what she wanted?
Mosby lied about the evidentiary basis to get the heat off of her. If the case collapses (as it should), she will then cry conspiracy to exonerate herself from this newest round of lies. After whipping the mob into an emotional frenzy, it will probably work.
As has been said before, the problems of Baltimore largely stem from its political class. The resolution of this case may be more evidence to that effect.
Alan Dershowitz has stated this was a political decision, not a legal decision. Acquittals will come back to haunt the DA as the mob will go bat caca crazy. Let it burn, they deserve their continued economic and spiritual poverty.
I see then that the “moby” has been superseded by the “mosby.”
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moby
A “mosby” is a discredit to American law and justice.
In a city that has huge ‘issues’ WRT trust and justice — along comes Mosby.
J’accuse !
It’s 1793-1794 (Paris) all over again —
with Twitter lynchings cutting through the ether.
&&&&&
You have to love the way Wiki totally morphs history.
If you wiki J’accuse ! you get tracts on Emile Zola.
The term leapt into political discourse during the Reign of Terror — more than a century before Zola revived it.
It was THE standard opening made from the floor when yet another victim of the Terror was thrown into the storm.
I would then be followed by a peroration damning the latest political target.
That an expression as famous as this is totally screwed up by Wiki illustrates the cyberspace hazard.
Digital records are wide open for the Winston Smithing of our political heritage.
Wiki has entirely morphed the history of Dachau, too.
Between Google and Wiki — our history is being totally corrupted — (and for our own good.)
As IF!
BTW, if Democrats are stirring up racial animosity to turn out the vote, the party MUST know that they stand to lose far more White votes than any Black votes they can get.
The Black vote is already maxxed out. The Dems knew this after the midterms. I don’t think America is going to thank them for continuing race riots.
Tatterdemalian Says:
May 6th, 2015 at 1:21 pm
As Instapundit points out, if the prosecutors don’t actually know whether Freddie Gray’s knife was illegal, how was Freddie Gray supposed to know?
&&&&&
You must be green to ‘street knives’ as ALL of the street boys know a switchblade straight off.
Uniquely, they POP OPEN — all the way — once you ‘press the magic button.’ The various designs largely vary on just exactly how the trigger is worked.
The energy for the snap opening is put into the switchblade during the prior closing process: you have to press against the spring action to get it to close. It then stays — very much like a knife version of a snare trap.
Switchblades are NEVER subtly different than a Boy Scout knife… which is famously stiff to open, BTW. — Very much a two handed affair.
There is one other feature common to all switchblades I’ve ever seen: the blade LOCKS OPEN.
This is in total contrast with a Boy Scout knife that will start to fold back into its case if used to thrust straight ahead. Even the slightest off-torque is enough to get a Boy Scout blade to begin retraction. It simply can’t be used like a dirk. A switchblade can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirk
Both dirks and switchblades are used exclusively to attack humans. I’ve never seen anyone use a switchblade to whittle some wood. (!)
[Traditionally, dirks were used in the non-dominant hand/ left hand during sword duels (to the death) in lieu of a shield. Their heyday was during the early pistol era — that of the one-shot weapon.
The fight would start with the pistol — and then shift to sword and dirk. Pistols ruined the defense logic of any shield. The newly ‘freed’ left hand picked up the dirk instead.]
&&&&&
Lastly, the experts have examined the knife and affirmed that it was a switchblade — no doubt at all.
BTW, the EXTERIOR of a switchblade doesn’t look like a pocket knife — at all. That and the steep price — one is never misled.
When this falls apart, as it should, will the mob know there’s no there there?
Of course not.
The risk was that the city was rioted out.
When this falls apart, we’ll have a cause for more riots.
Think that was the plan?
Caterpillar:
I see it as the most logical explanation, but obviously it’s just my opinion of what Mosby’s motivation was. I’m not a mind reader, nor have I ever held myself out to be.
Nice that you are so educated in your own opinions, blert. Now explain how Freddie Gray was supposed to have the psychic superpowers to know what your opinion is, so that he could avoid all the unpleasantness that led to his death.
Incidentally, my opinion is that switchblades are not used for the sole purpose of killing people, and in fact I own one to quickly cut ropes when I have only one hand available. So even if he did have the psychic superpowers to know what your opinion is, my opinion would cancel yours out.
What’s funny is that the man-murdering switchblade I carry was a gift from my parents, who are usually pretty opinionated about my habit of carrying lethal weapons in the presence of children. Maybe they hoped I would carry the switchblade instead of the much deadlier weapons I usually carry.
It’s mostly all a setup.
There is the lawyer union and their faction, call it what you will.
There’s the SEIU union and their faction.
There’s Nation of Islam, which essentially means Jackson and Sharpton’s faction.
There’s the teacher’s unions, but they aren’t related to this incident yet.
And there’s the police unions.
So in this instance, the lawyers are pushing on the police for better arrangements and money laundering, with the Nation of Islam people creating the riots to generate pressure and leverage for their own reasons.
This allows each union boss to tell their subordinates that they must sacrifice more, pay more dues, obey more authority, or else the other factions will gut em.
Usually the police uses the “suspended with pay” thing to do damage control and train up more goons.
The prosecution or the lawyer/judge faction like to use SWAT forces or charges to terrorize targets.
Jackson and NOI like to use riots and fear of getting killed by black mobs, to gain extortion cash.
All of them work together, one way or another. It just doesn’t appear like they work together.
Tatterdemalian, a lot of laws are getting to the point where it is too complicated for average people to figure out. Which is why lawyers are getting more power. When politicians are often lawyers, they get to write lawyers, then the judges determine the law, and the prosecution/defense attorneys get law suit cash from the victims.
The lawyer lobbies have done a relatively nice job of keeping the laws more and more complicated in Congress. Only lawyers can interpret, argue, and explain the law? Then citizens have far less influence and are kept as the cattle that they are.
Freddie Gray had an extensive criminal record, and this was well known to police officers in the community. He was, in short, known to engage in unlawful criminal activity with a frequency that would in any other context be considered evidence of a notable work ethic. He had at least 18 arrests in the ~8 years between 2007 and his death in 2015—and it is worth keeping in mind that the only reason his arrest record here begins in only in 2007 is that prior arrests would be sealed as juvenile records.
Was Gray’s record known to the specific police officers in question? Branca’s description (“well known to police officers in the community”) seems to indicate either no, guessing, or lack of knowledge. Why not simply say the officers in question knew Gray’s history? Why the circumlocution?
In addition, the neighborhood where the arrest occurred is known more generally for being a high-crime area, and so the police would be expected to be particularly attuned for indications of criminal conduct.
OK, known for what sort of crime? Drug dealing? Prostitution? Robbery? You can see the relevance. Is there constitutional permission to forcibly stop a person with a criminal record because he is in a “high crime” area? Oddly enough, high crime areas – – whatever that means, and we don’t know from Branca – – might have persons with criminal records in them exceeding other areas. A little more information would be useful. And just curious, but what is the logical relevance of the assertion that police need no reason to approach a person until interaction begins? That they get to appear in public? Padding?
In this context the police observe well-known criminal Gray acting in a manner that they perceive as noteworthy. The police begin to approach Gray, a form of police conduct that requires no particular legal justification at least until an actual interaction has begun. Observing the police approach, Gray substantially increases the suspiciousness of his conduct by fleeing the officers.
At this point the Constitutional grounds for a Terry stop have clearly been met.
Whenever a lawyer uses the word “clearly,” that might be a sign that something unsubstantiated is being advocated. Acting in a manner that the police perceive as “noteworthy” is not self-evident or helpful. Maybe Gray was doing a great imitation of BO. More to the point, what was he doing? Talking with a known drug dealer? Handing something off in a surreptitious manner? Do we know? Might that be significant to the question whether there was reasonable suspicion? Why aren’t we told? Wouldn’t the argument be stronger if we were?
Gray observes the officers approaching and flees their lawful stop, further establishing reasonable suspicion. The officers pursue.
The flight part might be significant, but it is hard to know without knowing what “noteworthy” thing Gray was doing, which we are not told. Neighborhood plus record is not enough, so what was he doing? My guess is that we will find out he engaged in some “furtive” movement, the highly significant “furtive movement,” but we don’t know that.
The officers prone out Gray and handcuff him, all perfectly lawful and consistent with securing the safety of a Terry stop.
OK, Gray is “proned out,” a Terry stop we are told. All well and good. I wonder, though (and why didn’t the author give us the actual law?) whether handcuffing might have indicated a more intensive level of state intrusion? Is there any legal significance to handcuffs at all? I would love to have learned the law which states that Terry permits handcuffing under these circumstances. “We can handcuff you to frisk you.” A lot of times handcuffs are an indication of arrest requiring probable cause. “Perfectly” lawful under Terry? As simple as that? Voila? Perfectly? Forfend an arrest took place. Does it matter whether Gray himself reasonably thought he was under arrest?
Raising Gray to a seated position, Officer Nero (along with Miller) observes a pocket knife clipped to Gray’s right pocket. The knife is secured and examined, again entirely consistent with securing a safe Terry stop.
It is well known that criminals place drugs on their central console as they are driving, that they place guns at their feet as they are driving, and that their cars smell of marijuana. There is no reason to disbelieve the police “observing” a pocket knife clipped to Gray’s pocket, is there? They are the police. Why would Gray bother to hide it when he is doing something noteworthy as a criminal in a high crime area?
None of this, of course, settles the arguably more central issue of how it came to be that Freddie Gray died in police custody, as we covered in our earlier post here.
I am trying to understand why this is not the significant and determinative point. “Arguably?” This is not the Martin or Brown case, where the actual facts were available to those with an open mind, contradicting the leftist propaganda.
@blert
Small detail.
Duels with sword and dagger were not that frequent. This is a bit of “Hollywood” stuff. Swords were relatively rare, since they are quite bothersome to carry.
In Spain, for example, people usually carried knives or “navajas” (blades). Fights were done with the knife in the right hand, and a drap wrapping the left hand, acting like a shield.
@Tonawanda
>> «Was Gray’s record known to the specific police officers in question? Branca’s description (“well known to police officers in the community”) seems to indicate either no, guessing, or lack of knowledge. Why not simply say the officers in question knew Gray’s history? Why the circumlocution?»
To show that their profiling of Gray as a possible crime offender was accurate. Same as Zimmerman: everyone was offended by his profiling of Martin. But the thing is: his profiling was accurate too, Martin had a crime record.
@ Yann: I don’t think it matters if the police guessed correctly. I think it matters whether they actually knew before they acted. I just wish Branca had told us, although I may very well have missed something he said.
Swords were relatively rare, since they are quite bothersome to carry.
4 foot long swords are only bothersome to carry in CQB or very narrow corridors, like those rat warren cities that humans like to build. I know, since I’ve walked around with a longsword at the belt.
The smaller swords and blades were more nimble, they were less expensive in terms of material cost, and they didn’t get in the way of normal movement as much. They were also more easy to conceal, which may or may not have mattered depending on what exactly one was planning to do with a blade.
A minor adjustment of the angle of the scabbard on the belt is needed when walking down or up stairs, or navigating tight corridors. These days, though, it is more likely to damage one’s scabbard than ripping a hole through a flimsy house or breaking a window. Property damage in the past, though, was why many people didn’t carry a lot of swords in public cities.
Also, untrained individuals can easily be killed by their own sword just the same with untrained users with firearms. The opponent pulls the sword out and stabs you with your own blade or they pull your gun out and shoots you with it. Untrained individuals are often more of a hazard to themselves and their fellows than the enemy is.
Keeping control of your space and using single cut draws or pommel draw strikes, is commonly required knowledge for users that walk around with weapons that are visible and that attackers can make an attempt to capture. As society falls ever down the slope where martial knowledge is lost, less and less people think it wise to carry around dangerous implements they know not how to use.
But the thing is: his profiling was accurate too, Martin had a crime record.
Profiling is designed to stop crime, it is not designed to create convenient reasons to execute criminals. For that, one needs a different justification and setup.
Mosby was responsible for the wrong Alicia White being contacted. How could this possibly have happened? The population must be informed of this!
Ymarsakar
Very interesting that folks seem to think profiling might have involved. I have not seen any evidence of that.
I think the more pertinent question to ask is what specific knowledge did the arresting officers have?
Although, actually, I don’t think it really matters whether the arrest was legal or not, except for a couple minor charges. The real question is whether Gray was being treated as a piece of non-consequential, inconvenient garbage.
That would be depraved.
Tonawanda:
Some of Branca’s statements refer back to things he has explained at great length in previous posts (such as, for example, what a Terry stop is).
Yann Says:
May 6th, 2015 at 9:43 pm
@blert
The period when BOTH pistols and swords were ‘in play’ was brief. Hotspur had something to say about that, too.
Swords hung on, and on, because:
Didn’t run out of powder.
Didn’t have issues with getting wet — cf pirates — ships at sea. It’s not for nothing that swords were last given up for close quarters sea fighting… and are still used ceremonially by the officers of the USN.
They also hung on and on in desert (dusty) fighting.
Indeed, they should’ve been abandoned much earlier… it’s just that gunpowder was such an iffy import.
Laying in big stores of gunpowder always has ‘issues.’
The American Revolution — the bit at Concord — was triggered precisely because the Colonists had just received their annual shipment of gunpowder — which was stored so famously ‘in common.’
The dufus newbie British commander — just off the boat in Boston — freaked out when he saw the stats. Hence his folly of marching on Concord to take all of it back.
Said gunpowder was THE primary mechanism for shooting deer — and feeding bellies. So it was no wonder that EVERY soul was up in arms over losing — what amounted to — their food supply — at the beginning of ‘hunting season.’ ( A pretty wide open calendar for the Colonists of that era.)
As for dirks in the boot: they go way-way-way back in English/ Scots/ Irish history.
Even today naughty electricians are referred to in that trade as “jacklegs.” ie as untrustworthy as those who carry dirks in their insoles. (This has double meanings as the IBEW is stuffed with Swedes (nee Vikings) and pole climbing foot-gear started out as a reversed dirk in the boot.)
Tatterdemalian Says:
May 6th, 2015 at 8:11 pm
Nice that you are so educated in your own opinions, blert. Now explain how Freddie Gray was supposed to have the psychic superpowers to know what your opinion is, so that he could avoid all the unpleasantness that led to his death.
&&&&&&
One does not accidentally purchase / acquire a switchblade… and every street kid knows that they are taboo.
If you’re willing to watch enough “Cops” footage, you’ll witness no small number of street players trying to ditch their switchblades.
They are, in most jurisdictions, as harmful to your case as a Saturday-night special, being the traditional weapon for armed robberies — on the street.
Do you watch many movies?
BTW, using a switchblade during a robbery MAKES it an “armed robbery.” A Boy Scout knife does not.
Switchblades are even used as comedic props.
In “The Big Easy” a cop is required to entirely remove all of his weapons. (John Goodman) He starts with the artillery…
When they are out on the table… next comes his switchblade…
Then the brass knuckles… (also taboo, BTW) etc.
It’s all done for laughs in this scene… the total absurdity.
Street players acquired switchblades BECAUSE they are switchblades — and are known far and wide to be very, very, naughty — and as damaging to a parolee as a handgun.
The above is not my mere opinion… it’s common street knowledge… even among the mentally challenged.
The manufacturers of switchblades are not subtle and do not make a product that could ever be confused with a Boy Scout knife — and their stuff is appropriately priced, too.
In most jurisdictions, you can’t even buy one… whereas you can buy a handgun! Now that’s taboo.
It’s All Theater.
All the uproar. The arrests. The riots. All ginned up, after the shakiest of inciting incidents, to create excuses for the Leftists to take ever more power.
We can argue about the fine points of the arrests and the merits of the cases, which should be done, but the big picture is that most people are birdbrains, like my personal trainer who wailed to me just Monday that “SOMEbody has to be guilty of SOMEthing! We’ve had all these cases!”
[He said “well, there was conflicting evidence(!!!!!) about the guy in Ferguson” when the guy in Ferguson was Completely Exonerated. That’s what we’re up against. This guy, by the way, has a pretty good IQ, but a huge GIGO problem.]
Creating that idiotic impression is all that counts. Kicking up enough sand. Most people don’t bother to look through it.
neo: yes, I incorporated those prior posts into my comments, having read his Terry explanation you refer to.
In fact, I was specifically commenting on Branca’s presentation of the Terry issue.
I realize, maybe I missed his coverage of the points I raised.
Just to refer to one aspect of his analysis, I am curious what legal authority Branca has for his statement that handcuffing is “perfectly” ok on a Terry stop. (His entire analysis is curiously lacking in cited legal authority for several assertions he makes – – for instance, when a pursuit constitutes a seizure, and what type of seizure it may constitute).
Based on Branca’s description in his posts, he seems to be saying the cuffs went on before the observation of the knife was made.
If handcuffing is not “perfectly” justified on a Terry stop, in other words if it is not always under every circumstance legally permitted, then perhaps it was not a Terry stop, perhaps it was an arrest, which does not depend on what the police call it, but what a judge later determines it to be.
And if it is an arrest at the moment of cuffing, perhaps the subsequent observations are illegal.
But again, as Branca says (curiously ambiguously) “arguably” his analysis is irrelevant to the bigger picture. Why even make that statement? Man up and tell us.
Now whether the analysis is or isn’t relevant, or the degree to which it is relevant to the bigger picture (to my mind) is a more significant discussion, as opposed to an occasion for bragging (“we actually cite the law!!!”).
Is the analysis closer in significance to the absurd gotcha Alicia White angle or to the bigger picture, how and why a shackled man in police custody died?
It used to be said that ignorance of the law was no excuse. That flew when most laws were derived from the Ten Commandments. There may have been a new way to steal but you knew you were stealing when you did it.
Now, when a bored ‘crat decides it should be a felony to interfere with the habitat of the frumious bandersnatch, you’re a federal felon when you pitch your old Christmas tree into the scrub next to the house. And if you claim there is no frumious bandersnatch, you’ve just admitted to killing it the last one.
So I have a problem with chasing a guy just because he runs. OTOH, there was a reference to a SCOTUS case somewhere saying that justified a cop’s stopping a guy. Whether the cops knew who this guy was–Grey with his record–I haven’t seen made clear.
The red herring about the legal knife is a big problem. Mosby had to know better. She lied about the case when she said what she said. On purpose.
@Ymarsakar Says:
“Profiling is designed to stop crime, it is not designed to create convenient reasons to execute criminals. For that, one needs a different justification and setup.”
Like somebody striking your head against the concrete?
@blert
The thing with swords is that they are pretty useless in daily life.
Gunpowder, bows, they´re good for hunting. Big knives, “machetes”, hatchets… all of them can be used as tools. Swords are basically dead weight unless you’re fighting with another soldier.
Not to say that a sword is made almost 100% of metal. An axe needs less iron, and iron was quite an expensive luxury back in Middle Ages, while wood was almost free.
Swords were a symbol of professional soldiers, precisely because they were useless as tools. In my opinion, the “romantic aura” they have is due to that.
Anyway, I hightly recommend you this blog, which is very interesting, specially about the european pre-american age. It’s in spanish, but google translator rules.
http://amodelcastillo.blogspot.com.es/
Here’s a very good article about left-handed daggers
http://amodelcastillo.blogspot.com.es/2012/12/las-dagas-de-mano-izquierda-1-tridentes.html
One of the symptoms that show how swords became purely decoritives is how middle age fighting was completely lost. For example, there were martial arts in Europe, during Middle Ages. When gunpowder arrived, that was completely lost.
http://amodelcastillo.blogspot.com.es/2012/12/artes-marciales-medievales.html
Real sword fight techniques were lost too. Last years, they’re being recovered in France and Germany
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFbQXpRvL2Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36KwfFZsnik
Tonawanda:
Unfortunately I don’t have time to go back and read Branca’s earlier posts carefully and see whether I agree that he’s unclear or wrong on any points. I do know that, when I read them, they seemed quite clear to me. Doing this just from memory, I recall that he was dividing the encounter into the stop, and then the fleeing, and then the arrest, all of which have different standards required.
Like somebody striking your head against the concrete?
Maybe it occurred, but that’s not a justification. The justification is usually “Martin tried to kill me, so I shot him back.”
Or, “I shot that guy in the back, because he stole my taser from me”
Later on, the taser was planted, of course.
To some humans that panic, people running away from them actually engenders the “hunter” reflex of “kill them all”. It’s weird, but true.
Society and the police want a justification, even if it is a flimsy one.
I wrote an Urban Jungle take on Martin Tray and Zimmerman’s situation when Neo blogged about it here. I won’t rehash my position since it wasn’t an orthodox or traditional one.
France and German patriots are doing a good job recovering their culture and history, perhaps precisely because it is under assault by immigrants and their own Leftist traitors.
As for lost martial knowledge, I believe the industrial revolution made it un economical for fathers to teach sons the family fighting trade, and thus it died out. Japan or China treated martial arts as family heirlooms, to be kept and maintained, passed on to the next generation. That made a big difference, even though Japan went through several Western esque revolutions in culture and politics.
If one could make a living doing MMA, I’m sure the Europeans would have sustained their family fighting arts and passed their own individual skills down to future generations. But the mercenary work and the warrior/soldier trades were more and more about the matchlock, the arquebus, yes. Shooting skills made people less reliant on melee skills.
Swords were tempered differently, in order to hold the edge. Thus sometimes it was a lot more brittle than the axe and could take a lot less shock punishment. Modern steel, especially tool steel, is very good as improvised tools however. But the ancients didn’t have access to the magic steel. Or if they did, it was too valuable to be wasted on work.
Western full plate would explain how so many styles of H2H fighting had little to no focus on touch contact sensitivity. Forearm sensitivity to predict strikes and deflect attacks don’t exist, whereas the Asians had less armor and more skin contact, so they developed along different lines.
To me, criminals like Martin and company are a minor threat. They can definitely kill people, but then again, they aren’t the only ones. So it’s easier to deal with individuals like that. Dealing with a SWAT team raid that thinks you need some good killing, when they’re at the wrong house and I’m asleep when they bust through the door… that is much more challenging and stressful. From either side it is.
neo: the whole Gray/Baltimore situation is very distressing.
It is distressing how many people don’t understand – – they are Americans, born in America, given a gift of happenstance which is unique in the history of mankind.
The divisions in this country are distressing, as if freedom and the dignity of each person – – the unique American way – – were not enough to expect or hope for.
Unlike Martin and Brown, where the facts were quickly available to anyone interested, Gray strikes me as holding potential aspects which could go anywhere. I could very well be wrong, maybe it is all out there right now.
In reading the internet, I see the harsh judgments being rendered. There is a sort of triumphalist tone all around which may very well turn out to be “vindicated,” and which has a great deal of truth to it.
And I totally realize the Left is stoking and fomenting, exploiting, without regard to the truth.
But the specific details ought to concern us, and the desire for a truthful outcome be our goal.
@Ymarsakar
In my opinion, the loss of Martial Arts in Europe is due to differences between asian and western culture. Western cares more about “efficiency”, asian about “tradition”, and when gunpowder arrives, martial arts become basically useless.
And they are still useless, even though they look great in movies, real wars are fought with firearms. Of course, you can still use them in melee, but the investment needed is too high in exchange of their usefulness. A simple knife is far more practical. You can see how thugs prefer to carry an switchblade instead of years of MA training.
You´re right about the contact sensitivity. Years ago during some MA courses we had some practices about contact fighting. It was all about sensing with your forearms, since you were too close to see clearly what the other person was doing. Never thought about it that way, but it makes sense.
About Martin… he was just a thug. There has been thugs the whole life. He was a minor threat, but this is not the problem. The problem is that a thug, who was a thug even though he never knew hunger and didn´t need to rob to eat, who tried to kill a man just because he was keeping an eye on him, he´s the bloody hero. Here in Baltimore, the same, rioters are the heros, police officers are the villains. So what’s the message you keep sending to society? That’s the big problem.
It was all about sensing with your forearms, since you were too close to see clearly what the other person was doing.
When the skin breathes and is free, it’s easier to evade blows via instinct or non visual senses. Air pressure, heat/cold, sometimes provide a person with so called preternatural senses in avoiding a death blow.
However, if a person is using armor, they don’t really feel much and when they do, it’s a bad thing, they got hit. Get enough of that and one’s bones will break and organs will rupture. It’s far easier to lock onto a target visually, rampage through them using strength, and overwhelm using the attack. In that sense, it’s far safer than relying on the armor to absorb hits. Any kind of armor.
Arrow deflection and other deflections usually only work because skin contact transmits information faster than visual. Or at least it transmits the information faster to the part of the brain that controls physical coordination. It’s not particularly a skill that is easy on mistakes, though. Armor plating can do the same thing, it just needs to be angled correctly. Meaning, more focus on visual arts.
Concerning H2H skill intensity and manhours, it is pretty intensive to get good at any particular thing. Although much of that can be slimmed down by getting rid of techniques, replacing it with a Tim Larkin esque principle or movement based system. Tony Blauer I think his name was, used the reflex method where a person raises his forearms up, and uses that as the base or foundation to start other attacks or defenses. Krav Maga was said to do the same, although it’s changed quite a bit now for public consumption.
For firearm users, though, H2H does provide one essential tool in the box. Which is the ability to disarm or stop disarms upon one’s person or arms. If a person grabs your gun and you have it locked ready to shoot, just fall on your back/behind, and let them straighten your arm out by pulling on you, then shoot them in the torso/face. It’s easy to aim that way, but it uses H2H techniques to get there. It’s not a struggle for the “weapon”.
Police officers are paranoid and afraid (often verging on cowardice in the line of duty) because they want to preserve their firearm and not allow it to get taken away by other people like crims. Without sufficient H2H power and control of their personal space, they just scrunch in like a turtle, going all defense. That’s not going to control or deter criminals. If a person wants to control his side arm, then they have to attack the threat, destroy the arms, break the legs, shatter the enemy’s brain cage. That will “protect” your sidearm. In many cases people only rush armed individuals because they think they can get there before the armed guy pulls out the gun. And in the case of some blacks on drugs, they are too high to think clearly and will charge regardless of what happens. They will run away and then “charge back” because they got stupid all of a sudden. Then 5 bullets won’t stop them because meth and cocaine is like a combat stimulant.
So H2H is still critical for the all range warrior or fighter. Urban fighters more so than rural ones that have longer range options.
Here in Baltimore, the same, rioters are the heros, police officers are the villains. So what’s the message you keep sending to society?
The Leftist alliance is pulling the strings. They create the thugs, they control the police, they send the police out after peaceful citizens while ordering them to protect the thugs. So in these circumstances, I don’t cheer for the LEOs, the thugs, the civilian who called 911, or the lawyers either. The problem isn’t that the factions fight each other, it is that the faction heads are planning it all together to enrich themselves.
So hypothetically, if Gray got executed by the police, due to the police hating thugs. Why do the police hate thugs? because the unions keep using the thugs to attack the police, and the police are told to make nice with the thugs by their higher ups. The police won’t refuse to obey, because the police are afraid of lawyers making their life hell and ending their career. And the lawyers and the unions are in it together to make more money. So it’s Gordian Knot, it cannot be solved, it can only be cut.
Another thing about fighting using contact, once a sword becomes part of my nervous system, I can generally visualize its exact length and dimensions. Meaning, if something impacts it, I can also feel where it came from. I can read visual ranges based upon how far my weapon can reach. The weapon masters of the medieval period, I presume, would have relied a lot more on weapon contact to give them tactical information. This would promote the European focus on “tools” as well as efficiency. Since a sword is generally longer and tougher than a forearm, even armor encased.
It is distressing how many people don’t understand — – they are Americans, born in America, given a gift of happenstance which is unique in the history of mankind.
They were given a gift they did not earn. They inherited a freedom that they cannot defend.
American freedom was not passed in the blood to future generations. It was not passed in the culture, songs, patriotism, or ideology. Thus it became diluted. And with a diluted life force, the Tree dies.
Ymarsakar, it’s nice to see that you’re still around peddling absolute nonsense.