I'm not picking on you here Don, but this is pretty hard to let go.
A) You are the one who should be armed. The ultimate in "self defense" is armed self defense. If you are really worried about protecting yourself and you are not using a weapon, you really aren't trying to protect yourself as best you can.
B) "He only has a knife, piece of cake". I'm sure that's sarcasm, but none the less; foolish. I would rather know nothing and be smaller then my attacker in an unarmed fight. Then face even the smallest unskilled child with "just a knife".
I don't know why everyone talks about "self defense" like it means unarmed fighting. I am armed 90% of the time, even in places where I'm not suppose to be armed. I do this for "self defense". Learning to box and wrestle is for children and sportsmen. If you are really interested in defending your life, use a weapon.
My point was that posters have said that aikido is meant for weapon and therefore will not work unarmed. At first I thought this meant all aikidoka are armed at all times. I then was told I was wrong and that aikidoka train against weapons and therefore are useless against bjj (or an unarmed attacker). This brings my sarcastic remark that a knife is easy but a unarmed attacker is too tough.
Obviously I do not want to fight anyone with a weapon. But if you can't deal with an unarmed person, how are you going to deal with an armed one? Its like the old aikido is for multiple opponent line. If you can't spar a single attacker, how can you deal with 3? I do not train anything for self defense. I'm not worried, I live in a great area. I train for the enjoyment it gives me. But I refuse to let people spout garbage and claim it as valid self defense.