I am removing the statement "Or the criminal will act with greater, possibly lethal, force at the onset of the assault, so as not to risk anything" because this does not appear to be the case.
1. Interviews with criminals have shown that they fear armed victims more than police ( http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Lott2.htm). This is backed up by the far lower percentage if occupied home invasions in areas with permissive firearms laws.
2. Even unarmed victims are likely to be seriously injured ( http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/sospi91.txt):
had knocked them out
3. Areas that have passed shall-issue concealed weapons laws have almost universally seen drops in violent crime, not increases in homicides related to robbery, while areas that have passed handgun bans have seen near universal increases in violent crime.
4. Killing the victim of an armed robbery out of hand will definately get an assailant charged with first degree homicide, which in many areas brings the risk of capital punishment or incarceration without parole, which is certainly a greater risk than a lesser armed robbery conviction. Also, gunfire is more likely to attract unwanted attention, and homicides are investigated far more vigorously than lesser crimes.
scot 19:57, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the article would be helped by an explanation of the legality of using such weapons in countries across the world. 124.185.28.139 07:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The article is in serious need of citations. A lot of the article seems to be disputable. eg. the katana being a standard defensive weapon in Japan. During it's prevalence, the katana was restricted mainly to Samurai and due to it's size, a smaller knife such as a tanto would seem a more likely defensive weapon. This sounds especially like an opinion about stun guns being "of very questionable use as a deterrent due to the low voltages they use." Beta34 23:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Assuming we were to move the article to the title "weapons for self defense", I think that would change the tone. It would be more of a list of characteristics and examples, which should be fairly easy to source; for example, there are going to be many articles on choosing a handgun for defensive carry, or a firearm for home defense, ammunition for various defensive uses, etc. It could also list lethal vs. less-lethal alternatives, and include legal and statistical information. For example, here's a good, recent source from the USDOJ that touches on the subject of defensive weapon use: Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self-Defense, and Firearm Theft. How's this for a potential section layout:
Let me know what you think, and I'll see about a re-write soon. scot ( talk) 16:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, there seems to have been little progress on fixing the issues with this page, so I'm going to go ahead and redirect this to 'Self Defence'. I think there is a systemic issue here that 'Defensive weapon' is a term of language, not easily defined, and that the article as it currently is seeks to define it as one meaning, based on what appears to be Original Research. There is nothing unique to this article that isn't discussed elsewhere on wikipedia, and in more depth and with fuller context. -- Barberio ( talk) 05:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I am removing the statement "Or the criminal will act with greater, possibly lethal, force at the onset of the assault, so as not to risk anything" because this does not appear to be the case.
1. Interviews with criminals have shown that they fear armed victims more than police ( http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Lott2.htm). This is backed up by the far lower percentage if occupied home invasions in areas with permissive firearms laws.
2. Even unarmed victims are likely to be seriously injured ( http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/sospi91.txt):
had knocked them out
3. Areas that have passed shall-issue concealed weapons laws have almost universally seen drops in violent crime, not increases in homicides related to robbery, while areas that have passed handgun bans have seen near universal increases in violent crime.
4. Killing the victim of an armed robbery out of hand will definately get an assailant charged with first degree homicide, which in many areas brings the risk of capital punishment or incarceration without parole, which is certainly a greater risk than a lesser armed robbery conviction. Also, gunfire is more likely to attract unwanted attention, and homicides are investigated far more vigorously than lesser crimes.
scot 19:57, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the article would be helped by an explanation of the legality of using such weapons in countries across the world. 124.185.28.139 07:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The article is in serious need of citations. A lot of the article seems to be disputable. eg. the katana being a standard defensive weapon in Japan. During it's prevalence, the katana was restricted mainly to Samurai and due to it's size, a smaller knife such as a tanto would seem a more likely defensive weapon. This sounds especially like an opinion about stun guns being "of very questionable use as a deterrent due to the low voltages they use." Beta34 23:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Assuming we were to move the article to the title "weapons for self defense", I think that would change the tone. It would be more of a list of characteristics and examples, which should be fairly easy to source; for example, there are going to be many articles on choosing a handgun for defensive carry, or a firearm for home defense, ammunition for various defensive uses, etc. It could also list lethal vs. less-lethal alternatives, and include legal and statistical information. For example, here's a good, recent source from the USDOJ that touches on the subject of defensive weapon use: Guns and Crime: Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self-Defense, and Firearm Theft. How's this for a potential section layout:
Let me know what you think, and I'll see about a re-write soon. scot ( talk) 16:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, there seems to have been little progress on fixing the issues with this page, so I'm going to go ahead and redirect this to 'Self Defence'. I think there is a systemic issue here that 'Defensive weapon' is a term of language, not easily defined, and that the article as it currently is seeks to define it as one meaning, based on what appears to be Original Research. There is nothing unique to this article that isn't discussed elsewhere on wikipedia, and in more depth and with fuller context. -- Barberio ( talk) 05:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)