Higher education pays off!

Rick · 16th September 2009, 02:04 AM

Not worth a life; we digress .

asomotif · 16th September 2009, 06:34 AM

I see nothing of the burglar being armed.

What is "lunged".

Here in the Netherlands I guess the student would be in severe problems facing several years for manslaughter. Which seems right to me.

Jim McDougall · 16th September 2009, 07:29 PM

How does this news item help in the study of ethnographic arms? It would seem this type of contextual sensationalism is exactly what weapons control factions are looking for, and encouraging more entries with these decidedly unfortunate media items is entirely counterproductive offering nothing to the study of weapons.

As far as the news is concerned, the 'Samurai' sword is now a deadly weapon, and can be used indiscriminately in foul play!

There simply must be better things to discuss on a forum intended for the study of weapons as historical material culture, not forensics evidence in the neverending media bloodbath that feeds on these kinds of events.

Im for changing course and returning to focus on historical weapons, and letting this discussion end.

Jim

Lew · 16th September 2009, 07:42 PM

[QUOTE=asomotif]I see nothing of the burglar being armed.

What is "lunged".

Could have been grapping at the sword which was a poor choice somehow 4 male 20 yr olds one armed I would have ran away. I agree this is media hype at best.

Rick

If the student had a keris which jump from it's scabbard and chased the burglar than that would have been something to talk about

The burglar was a career criminal who had just been released from prison a fews days before this happened. Someone breaks into my home at 1am I will not ask if he is armed

He just picked the wrong home to break into.

Rick We all collect swords,daggers,spears and clubs so if this were to happen to a forum member don't you think it could have been a similar outcome? One of the rare pitfalls of collecting and studying weapons I would think?

KuKulzA28 · 16th September 2009, 08:00 PM

I might have done the same. Perhaps cause I am in the same age group. If I was holding a sword, and the guy knew he would die... and he still lunged... well, he is stupid. He should have expected the worst being a criminal. If I can defend myself, my property, and my hard earned possessions against someone who is a criminal, why shouldn't I? Just because some would consider it brutal does not take away from the statement's validity... cancer, drunk driver, cops, and thugs never cared for my friends' lives - why should I care about a burglar's?

If you had a weapon to defend yourself with, and the burglar lunged at you, would you drop it, and say, I don't wanna kill you, just take whatever? Crazy.

I understand though, why you guys would like discussion on this topic to end, and if the prevailing opinion is that it should be closed, so be it. I just feel that there is a lot of opinion against the sword-wielder - I can understand where he is coming from.

Anyone who's ever been in a similar situation especially at that age, would not want to back down and "bend over" so to speak.

Jim McDougall · 16th September 2009, 09:34 PM

Let the editorials begin!
Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it.
Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ?

In a life threatening situation, anything is a weapon...... and regarded as a 'weapon of opportunity'. Why not discuss all the same kinds of situations where individuals are clobbered with blunt force by hammers, crowbars or stabbed with huge butcher knives.........it would be impossible to talk about shootings, which are no less tragic or dramatic, but after all, thats just..uh, news.

So thats my perspective, why close this discussion?

lets have some more chest pounding

great break from talking about historical weapons.

Lew · 16th September 2009, 10:30 PM

[QUOTE=Jim McDougall]Let the editorials begin!
Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it.
Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ?

Jim

It could have been a dha the police would have no clue and call it a samurai sword anyway

]

Lew · 16th September 2009, 10:35 PM

Officer I was just oiling my 19th century wootz tulwar when I heard a strange noise coming from the garage.

The buglar jump high into the air and when he came down on the blade it just sliced him in two just like those silk scarfs

Rick · 16th September 2009, 09:58 PM

[QUOTE=LOUIEBLADES]

Quote:

Originally Posted by asomotif

Rick We all collect swords,daggers,spears and clubs so if this were to happen to a forum member don't you think it could have been a similar outcome? One of the rare pitfalls of collecting and studying weapons I would think?

Always remember these words:
" I was in fear for my life "

Rich · 16th September 2009, 10:29 PM

"samurai sword" is the media general term for any style Japanese sword. It might have been a Walmart wall hanger for all we know. Personally I prefer a 357.

Rich

fearn · 16th September 2009, 10:38 PM

I'm of a couple of minds on this. Part of me just wants to ask for thread to be locked (sorry Ariel), part wants to talk it out.

The big issue here is about self defense. Here's the Maryland Self defense law, according to Wikipedia.

Here are a couple of relevant paragraphs, snipped from said article (and remember, I'm not a lawyer).

Self-Defense (MPJI-Cr 5:07)
Self-defense is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present:

1) The defendant actually believed that <he> <she> was in immediate and imminent danger of bodily harm.
2) The defendant's belief was reasonable.
3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend <himself> <herself> in light of the threatenend or actual harm.
<Deadly-force is that amount of force reasonably calculated to cause death or serious bodily harm. If the defendant is found to have used deadly-force, it must be decided whether the use of deadly-force was reasonable. Deadly-force is reasonable if the defendant actually had a reasonable belief that the aggressor's force was or would be deadly and that the defendant needed a deadly-force response.>

<In addition, before using deadly-force, the defendant is required to make all reasonable effort to retreat. The defendant does not have to retreat if the defendant was in <his> <her> home, retreat was unsafe, the avenue of retreat was unknown to the defendant, the defendant was being robbed, the defendant was lawfully arresting the victim. If the defendant was found to have not used deadly-force, then the defendant had no duty to retreat.>

Defense of Habitation - Deadly Force (MPJI-Cr 5:02)
Defense of one's home is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present:

1) The defendant actually believed that (victim) was committing <was just about to commit> the crime of (crime) in <at> the defendant's home.
2) The defendant's belief was reasonable.
3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against the conduct of (victim).

It's that "no more force than was reasonably necessary" clause that's keeping the sheriffs busy.

For example: did the student realize that he could have used his sword as a bludgeon? I suspect the law is different depending on whether he was trained in how to use that sword, or whether he was just lashing out, following the examples he'd seen in movies?

Conversely, the student might have tried to simply slash the burglar, and the burglar did the instinctive thing of trying to block the sword with his arm, resulting in a severed wrist and bleed-out.

I think the bottom line for all of us is to make sure that our self-defense activities are well within the laws. As Rick noted, if you don't have "I was afraid for my life" tattoed inside your eyelids, you might want to engrave it on the hilt of the sword by your bed.

Best,

F

Lew · 16th September 2009, 10:45 PM

Fearn

We will have to all have a questionare ready for the burglar when breaks in please anwser the following are you here only to rob? Rob and rape? Rob rape and murder. Sorry but retreating upstairs into a locked room and hope this guy was not armed and and looking to kill me is silly. There was a case my friend told me about in Illinois where this guy broke into this man home 2am inthe morning his wife and kids were upstairs so he grabbed his handgun and as he was walking down the stairs the buglar was coming up and had a crowbar in his hand so the homeowner shot and killed the guy with the crow bar . The police ended up arresting him because he did not try to retreat.

fearn · 16th September 2009, 10:58 PM

Hi Louie,

Here's an example. Let's say I have a large, sharp kukri near my bed. An unarmed burglar breaks in. I confront him with the bare blade. He doesn't run.

I

A) hit him hard with the flat or spine of the blade, and if he doesn't get the idea, cut him as hard as I can with the edge on the backswing, or

B) go for an immediate kill.

Depends on the situation. The one I train is A), because the state where I live doesn't let me kill burglars for being in my house, although it lets me use lethal self defense if I'm in fear for my life. That fear is the standard. If you're afraid, you're allowed to act on that fear.

Personally, I'd rather knock burglar-dude down the stairs and let the police make him walk off on two broken ankles. Saves me the angst and the cleanup bills.

That's the problem with this case. In Maryland, case-law supports the student, not statue law, and we don't know the circumstances of the scuffle. If he went after the burglar with his sword, and all the cuts on the burglar are defensive, the student commited manslaughter, not self-defense.

We just don't know what happened, despite (or perhaps because of) all the publicity this has garnered.

I'm not saying retreat, what I'm saying is know what you're allowed to do legally, and make sure your first line of defense follows the law. What you do after that is up to you.

Best,

F

16th September 2009, 07:42 PM	#4
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	[QUOTE=asomotif]I see nothing of the burglar being armed. What is "lunged". Could have been grapping at the sword which was a poor choice somehow 4 male 20 yr olds one armed I would have ran away. I agree this is media hype at best. Rick If the student had a keris which jump from it's scabbard and chased the burglar than that would have been something to talk about The burglar was a career criminal who had just been released from prison a fews days before this happened. Someone breaks into my home at 1am I will not ask if he is armed He just picked the wrong home to break into. Rick We all collect swords,daggers,spears and clubs so if this were to happen to a forum member don't you think it could have been a similar outcome? One of the rare pitfalls of collecting and studying weapons I would think? Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 16th September 2009 at 08:02 PM.

16th September 2009, 10:38 PM	#11
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	I'm of a couple of minds on this. Part of me just wants to ask for thread to be locked (sorry Ariel), part wants to talk it out. The big issue here is about self defense. Here's the Maryland Self defense law, according to Wikipedia. Here are a couple of relevant paragraphs, snipped from said article (and remember, I'm not a lawyer). Self-Defense (MPJI-Cr 5:07) Self-defense is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present: 1) The defendant actually believed that <he> <she> was in immediate and imminent danger of bodily harm. 2) The defendant's belief was reasonable. 3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend <himself> <herself> in light of the threatenend or actual harm. <Deadly-force is that amount of force reasonably calculated to cause death or serious bodily harm. If the defendant is found to have used deadly-force, it must be decided whether the use of deadly-force was reasonable. Deadly-force is reasonable if the defendant actually had a reasonable belief that the aggressor's force was or would be deadly and that the defendant needed a deadly-force response.> <In addition, before using deadly-force, the defendant is required to make all reasonable effort to retreat. The defendant does not have to retreat if the defendant was in <his> <her> home, retreat was unsafe, the avenue of retreat was unknown to the defendant, the defendant was being robbed, the defendant was lawfully arresting the victim. If the defendant was found to have not used deadly-force, then the defendant had no duty to retreat.> Defense of Habitation - Deadly Force (MPJI-Cr 5:02) Defense of one's home is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present: 1) The defendant actually believed that (victim) was committing <was just about to commit> the crime of (crime) in <at> the defendant's home. 2) The defendant's belief was reasonable. 3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against the conduct of (victim). It's that "no more force than was reasonably necessary" clause that's keeping the sheriffs busy. For example: did the student realize that he could have used his sword as a bludgeon? I suspect the law is different depending on whether he was trained in how to use that sword, or whether he was just lashing out, following the examples he'd seen in movies? Conversely, the student might have tried to simply slash the burglar, and the burglar did the instinctive thing of trying to block the sword with his arm, resulting in a severed wrist and bleed-out. I think the bottom line for all of us is to make sure that our self-defense activities are well within the laws. As Rick noted, if you don't have "I was afraid for my life" tattoed inside your eyelids, you might want to engrave it on the hilt of the sword by your bed. Best, F Last edited by fearn; 16th September 2009 at 10:48 PM. Reason: correcting error

16th September 2009, 10:45 PM	#12
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Fearn We will have to all have a questionare ready for the burglar when breaks in please anwser the following are you here only to rob? Rob and rape? Rob rape and murder. Sorry but retreating upstairs into a locked room and hope this guy was not armed and and looking to kill me is silly. There was a case my friend told me about in Illinois where this guy broke into this man home 2am inthe morning his wife and kids were upstairs so he grabbed his handgun and as he was walking down the stairs the buglar was coming up and had a crowbar in his hand so the homeowner shot and killed the guy with the crow bar . The police ended up arresting him because he did not try to retreat. Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 16th September 2009 at 10:59 PM.

16th September 2009, 02:04 AM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Not worth a life; we digress .

16th September 2009, 06:34 AM	#2
asomotif Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,228	I see nothing of the burglar being armed. What is "lunged". Here in the Netherlands I guess the student would be in severe problems facing several years for manslaughter. Which seems right to me.

16th September 2009, 07:29 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	How does this news item help in the study of ethnographic arms? It would seem this type of contextual sensationalism is exactly what weapons control factions are looking for, and encouraging more entries with these decidedly unfortunate media items is entirely counterproductive offering nothing to the study of weapons. As far as the news is concerned, the 'Samurai' sword is now a deadly weapon, and can be used indiscriminately in foul play! There simply must be better things to discuss on a forum intended for the study of weapons as historical material culture, not forensics evidence in the neverending media bloodbath that feeds on these kinds of events. Im for changing course and returning to focus on historical weapons, and letting this discussion end. Jim

16th September 2009, 08:00 PM	#5
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	I might have done the same. Perhaps cause I am in the same age group. If I was holding a sword, and the guy knew he would die... and he still lunged... well, he is stupid. He should have expected the worst being a criminal. If I can defend myself, my property, and my hard earned possessions against someone who is a criminal, why shouldn't I? Just because some would consider it brutal does not take away from the statement's validity... cancer, drunk driver, cops, and thugs never cared for my friends' lives - why should I care about a burglar's? If you had a weapon to defend yourself with, and the burglar lunged at you, would you drop it, and say, I don't wanna kill you, just take whatever? Crazy. I understand though, why you guys would like discussion on this topic to end, and if the prevailing opinion is that it should be closed, so be it. I just feel that there is a lot of opinion against the sword-wielder - I can understand where he is coming from. Anyone who's ever been in a similar situation especially at that age, would not want to back down and "bend over" so to speak.

16th September 2009, 09:34 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Let the editorials begin! Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it. Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ? In a life threatening situation, anything is a weapon...... and regarded as a 'weapon of opportunity'. Why not discuss all the same kinds of situations where individuals are clobbered with blunt force by hammers, crowbars or stabbed with huge butcher knives.........it would be impossible to talk about shootings, which are no less tragic or dramatic, but after all, thats just..uh, news. So thats my perspective, why close this discussion? lets have some more chest pounding great break from talking about historical weapons.

16th September 2009, 10:30 PM	#7
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	[QUOTE=Jim McDougall]Let the editorials begin! Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it. Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ? Jim It could have been a dha the police would have no clue and call it a samurai sword anyway ]

16th September 2009, 10:35 PM	#8
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Officer I was just oiling my 19th century wootz tulwar when I heard a strange noise coming from the garage. The buglar jump high into the air and when he came down on the blade it just sliced him in two just like those silk scarfs

16th September 2009, 10:29 PM	#10
Rich Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: comfortably at home, USA Posts: 432	"samurai sword" is the media general term for any style Japanese sword. It might have been a Walmart wall hanger for all we know. Personally I prefer a 357. Rich

16th September 2009, 10:58 PM	#13
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Louie, Here's an example. Let's say I have a large, sharp kukri near my bed. An unarmed burglar breaks in. I confront him with the bare blade. He doesn't run. I A) hit him hard with the flat or spine of the blade, and if he doesn't get the idea, cut him as hard as I can with the edge on the backswing, or B) go for an immediate kill. Depends on the situation. The one I train is A), because the state where I live doesn't let me kill burglars for being in my house, although it lets me use lethal self defense if I'm in fear for my life. That fear is the standard. If you're afraid, you're allowed to act on that fear. Personally, I'd rather knock burglar-dude down the stairs and let the police make him walk off on two broken ankles. Saves me the angst and the cleanup bills. That's the problem with this case. In Maryland, case-law supports the student, not statue law, and we don't know the circumstances of the scuffle. If he went after the burglar with his sword, and all the cuts on the burglar are defensive, the student commited manslaughter, not self-defense. We just don't know what happened, despite (or perhaps because of) all the publicity this has garnered. I'm not saying retreat, what I'm saying is know what you're allowed to do legally, and make sure your first line of defense follows the law. What you do after that is up to you. Best, F