Jagdkommando Integral Tri-Dagger Fixed Blade Knife

To inflict serious, permanent and perhaps deadly damage, samurais, marines and seals are taught to stab and twist with the knife. This results in torn organs and the release of an uncanny amount of blood. But it still helps to use the best survival knives while putting this into practice. Once you’ve got this knife, all you’ll need is to take a look at how the first 24 is a survival kit for preppers and mad max cosplayers. 

With the Jagdkommando Integral Tri-Dagger Fixed Blade Knife, designed by Tony Marfione, the aforementioned technique will hardly be necessary thanks to its razor sharp tri edge design.  We can only assume this blade is illegal in most if not all US states, though one might be able to mask it’s true utility thanks to the glass breaker that is integrated into the handle.  The blade itself is made of stainless steel and the sheath aluminum, which sports a belt loop. For another convenient knife option, take a look at our review of the hidden ninja belt knife too.

Unfortunately, the Jagdkommando Integral Tri-Dagger Fixed Blade Knife is not in stock and we don’t know the price. If you’d rather look a knife that you know is available, you should also look at our review of these Biohazard Knives.

Update: Knifecenter.com has it for $856.

Also why not check out:

Christen Costa

Grew up back East, got sick of the cold and headed West. Since I was small I have been pushing buttons - both electronic and human. With an insatiable need for tech I thought "why not start a blog focusing on technology, and use my dislikes and likes to post on gadgets."

Related Articles

16 Comments

  1. I have a nice clone from China (100 USD or so) and that´s the most I would pay. In front of a Fairbairn-Sykes dagger or a Ka-Bar knife, the Jagdkommando knife is less usefull I think (excuse me I have to unscrew my dagger so wait a little bit to receive my stabbing). But also its attractive form for colectors is the reason of its fame.

  2. Good Grief people.  None of the *four* Geneva conventions have anything to do with weapons. The Geneva conventions lay out the rule set for the treatment of NON-COMBATANTS by signatories.

  3. Violates the Geneva convention…  Who the sam monkey fuck says that, really?  God, kill yourself you idiot.  A comment like that makes me want to stab babies with this just to watch you cry, queer.

    1. The Geneva Conventions are a series of treaties on the treatment of civilians, prisoners of war (POWs) and soldiers who are otherwise rendered hors de combat, or incapable of fighting. The first Convention was initiated by the International Committee for Relief to the Wounded (which became the International Committee for the Red Cross and Red Crescent). This convention produced a treaty designed to protect wounded and sick soldiers during wartime. The Swiss Government agreed to hold the Conventions in Geneva, and a few years later, a similar agreement to protect shipwrecked soldiers was produced. In 1949, after World War II, two new Conventions were added to the original two, and all four were ratified by a number of countries. The 1949 versions of the Conventions, along with two additional Protocols, are in force today.

      Convention I: This Convention protects wounded and infirm soldiers and medical personnel against attack, execution without judgment, torture, and assaults upon personal dignity (Article 3). It also grants them the right to proper medical treatment and care.

      Convention II: This agreement extended the protections mentioned in the first Convention to shipwrecked soldiers and other naval forces, including special protections afforded to hospital ships.

      Convention III: One of the treaties created during the 1949 Convention, this defined what a Prisoner of War was, and accorded them proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention. Specifically, it required POWs to give only their name, rank, and serial number to their captors. Nations party to the Convention may not use torture to extract information from POWs.

      Convention IV: Under this Convention, civilians are afforded the protections from inhumane treatment and attack afforded in the first Convention to sick and wounded soldiers. Furthermore, additional regulations regarding the treatment of civilians were introduced. Specifically, it prohibits attacks on civilian hospitals, medical transports, etc. It also specifies the right of internees, and those who commit acts of sabotage. Finally, it discusses how occupiers are to treat an occupied populace.

      Protocol I: In this additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions, the signing Nations agreed to further restrictions on the treatment of “protected persons” according to the original Conventions. Furthermore, clarification of the terms used in the Conventions was introduced. Finally, new rules regarding the treatment of the deceased, cultural artifacts, and dangerous targets (such as dams and nuclear installations) were produced.

      Protocol II: In this Protocol, the fundamentals of “humane treatment” were further clarified. Additionally, the rights of interned persons were specifically enumerated, providing protections for those charged with crimes during wartime. It also identified new protections and rights of civilian populations.

      The United States has ratified the four Conventions of 1949, but has not ratified the two additional Protocols of 1977.
      Disputes arising under the Conventions or the Protocols additional to them are settled by courts of the member nations (Article 49 of Convention I) or by international tribunals.
      The International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent has a special role given by the Geneva Conventions, whereby it handles, and is granted access to, the wounded, sick, and POWs

  4. I’m fairly certain this knife violates several human rights laws… The Geneva Convention outlawed bayonets that had more than two major sides, such as the crucifix bayonet issued to many Russian soldiers during WW2. Granted this isn’t a bayonet, or a knife that will be used in warfare, but I see major lawsuits abounding if this knife is truly on the market.

    1. It violates the Geneva Convention in terms of weaponry used during war time, yes. But to own at home as a collectible, it would certainly depend on your local laws.

    2. The Geneva convention doesn’t apply except to soldiers in war…
      Case in point, soldiers are prohibited from using hollow-point bullets, but civilians and police use them almost exclusively (except for target shooting)

Leave a Reply

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

Back to top button
Close