Aikido's technical syllabus is designed mostly to deal with:
You being armed and your attackers unarmed, quite likely out numbering you.
But it also has techniques to deal with:
Them armed, you unarmed.
You armed, them armed as well.
I fully understand your point. And I thought about that before I posted it. However I believe it is mankind's right to be armed, and if everyone took an open stance about it, it would simply be understood. And we would no longer have to fear repercussions arming ourselves.
Oddly, I only have a little under 2 years training aikido, yet I have not once been shown how to use a weapon. I have been shown kata's that were designed to help me extend further and develop ki and improve my unarmed techniques. But not once have I been shown how to defend myself with a weapon. This tells me that at least the style I trained does not focus on weapons as a means of self defense. The self defense portion of any art is usually the gross motor skill techniques taught at the beginning (aka the basics).
what you have basically said is counter to what you have previously said. If I understand you right you have just said aikido can deal with armed or unarmed attackers while you are armed or unarmed. But in the bjj thread you said aikido can not deal with unarmed while you are unarmed and was not ment to do this.
I submit that at least the aikido I have been taught is designed to deal with an unarmed attacker who attacks you in a way that assumes you might be armed (thus the focus on wrist grabs which is a great way to prevent a sword draw) and also focuses on very primitive forms of weapon defense (lunge knife stabs and swings of clubs). However these principles can be applied to more advanced weapons techniques and unarmed techniques. However the core of what I was shown was to deal with wild swings (haymakers), lunge punches and grabs of all kinds. This leads me to believe that trained properly aikido could help you develop skills to control attackers who are either in escape mode, untrained, or so angry they are stupid. Which could be great for police.
There is no reason however these same principles could not be applied to proper defenses to skilled attacks. There is no reason there can not be an aiki sprawl. The technique itself does not have to change, but the intention can make a big difference, as well as the strategy in which it is employed.
In conclusion, I'm still confused as to the point you are trying to make about aikido, and armed vs unarmed self defense and effectiveness. If all we need are weapons, lets buy some guns and get proper training on their use and retention. If armed is the only thing that matters, this method will nullify the use of aikido for self defense and relegate it to the study of ancient weapons and history and philosophy.