Question Of The Day: What If Zimmerman Had Used A Knife To Defend Himself?


What if George Zimmerman had used a knife instead of a gun while Trayvon Martin was straddling him, pummeling him and beating his head into the pavement? The butcher’s bill might have been the same at the end of the night, because an upward stab to the chest can cause death just as quickly as a 9mm hollowpoint.

Would the politics of race have spun out differently if there were no gunshot in the background of the 911 call? Would cooler heads have prevailed if the national Gun Control Industrial Complex hadn’t sensed an opportunity to blame guns for the whole tragedy?

I’ll take a back seat here. What would have happened differently since that night, if Martin had died from a knife instead of a gun that night?


  1. Aharon says:

    Obviously, the gun-grabbers would not have been able to join in and help whip up the extra drama a guns brings to fight ending in a death. The race-war opportunists from both sides would have still joined in. Some would claim GZ planned to kill TM silently with his knife. I suspect the whole thing would have gone quieter with not so much national attention. Would the White House and federal government have joined in so fast siding with TM I don’t know.

  2. PathfinderSgt says:

    Here’s what would have happened:

    BOTH would be all bloodied up, and there would be a hell of a lot more wounds on both. The types, depths, and manners of delivery of the stab/cut wounds would certainly have been analyzed to indicate a level of hatred. The blade itself may have been stuck on a rib. For certain, Martin might have (probably would have) lived longer and this trial may still be going on.

    I like knives. They are useful tools. BUT: I tend to view a blade as a necessity to get to a pistol. Which itself is a necessity to get to a long gun. A knife is a brutal and bloody weapon, although it is something of a deterrent too. A big man with a gun and a frown is probably not nearly as frightening as a little guy with a big knife and a grin.

    Just saying.

    1. Kirk says:

      What would have happened? The MSM would never have appended “White” to “Hispanic” because everyone knows about Hispanics and knives.

      Actually, the most significant thing that would have happened is that no one’s Civil Rights would have been violated.

      Namely: Geo. Zimmerman’s. By The State of Florida.

    2. Sam L. says:

      There was a photo I found on the web of a Ghurka holding a khukri with that saying underneath.

  3. Loyd says:

    Based on the media’s preconceived prejudices about knives, I think Zimmerman would already be on death row. The story would have changed from “over zealous neighborhood watch captain” to “knife-wielding psycho hunts down children to add to his collection of ears he keeps on a necklace”. For whatever reason, even people who don’t like guns understand that guns for self-defense are OK, but somehow knives are completely out of line. I doubt there’s a person on this site who doesn’t have a knife on them, and understands that it’s in the continuum of force (I have a 3″ assisted opener). But the damn media would gotten its lynching if Zimmerman had pulled out a Benchmade instead of a KelTec.

  4. Old Ben turning in grave says:

    People would have been less likely to get their undies in a bunch (no gun control/concealed carry angle, also harder to say he was looking for trouble by carrying a knife which many people carry as a tool). Legally speaking, I wouldn’t think there should be any difference, though. Deadly force is deadly force (though I don’t know how Florida law views it).

  5. Don says:

    The local headline would have been “hispanic man kills black teen with knife” and we’d not have heard anything about it.

  6. Blehtastic says:

    Aren’t knife wounds of a similar depth usually even more traumatic than bullet wounds?

    1. scubamatt says:

      No, because a wound from a blade doesn’t have the secondary effect of hydrostatic shock (the ‘temporary wound cavity’ as energy is transferred during impact and passage of the bullet). Injuries from bullets are generally more traumatic than those of any edged weapon…however under certain circumstances an edged weapon will achieve greater depth of penetration, and the effects of laceration across major muscle groups can be more severe.

      As one example, a bullet wound to the thigh is not likely to immobilize you rapidly (though a hit to the femoral artery will kill you pretty quickly from blood loss). A deep slash to the thigh may sever the muscles and tendons, causing you to lose the loss of the leg on the spot because you literally have nothing to push/pull your lower leg/foot with anymore.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Question Of The Day: What If Zimmerman Had Used A Knife To Defend Himself?

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email