NationStates Jolt Archive

Which takes more skill, firing a gun or swinging a sword? Or better yet which is funner?
Here you can type about what is better and which weapon you prefer, and are specific. Do not use words like bombs because there is a lot of different type of bombs. So go on, type.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I like Brazos Custom Pro SC Series handgun. Its cool looking and sleek, that’s why I like it.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.brazoscustom.com/Images/ProLim.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.brazoscustom.com/&h=286&w=400&sz=42&tbnid=zudUCZ-1pgGgWM:&tbnh=85&tbnw=120&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhandguns%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DX

I think it requires the most willpower and the greatest amount of skill not to use a weapon at all.


Footnote: 1000th post!

It takes little skill to fire a gun or swing a sword. To do so proficiently, however, does.

Me, I like both.

Not everyone can learn to use one proficiently. It's a bit more work to learn to use a sword (you have to be in good shape), but you have to have some physical ability to use a firearm proficiently.

Using either in combat involves moving around, etc. - and involves some intelligence and tactical ability. These things take time and effort to learn well.

There is also a point of diminishing returns for training masses of soldiers in either - even a great swordsman or a great shot can be overwhelmed by a large number of mediocre opponents.

Now someone will come along and say a sword because in a blink of an eye they could take both your arms of and turn you into a tripod with a katana, therefore the sword is superior.

I'll go right ahead and disagree with that future statement. The problem with swords is that the user has to releatively close. With a gun I can be a 1/2 mile away and turn you into some Swiss cheesel. So what if it's not "honorable"? If I'm fighting for my life, fuck honor, I want you to die and me to live.

I guess the jist of it is, I like guns. Thinking of buying one as well.....just so I can call it a nine.:)

Hurrah for gun-fetishism! /sarcasm

All I know about weaponry is stuff from Operation Flashpoint and its mods, wiki and Counter-Strike.

From those information sources, the FN Five-seveN seems to be a rather fine choice of weapon. But then they're just games/crap encyclopedias.


I find (personally) that swords are cooler than guns (animé ftw!). But neither is too good at crowd control compared to a pike. For they are long and pointy.

Unlike the Sesame Street songs, which are short and pointless, but are still effective as a weapon, it would seem. And a fairly horrendous weapon too.

how about a mix: http://www.amren.com/974issue/bayonet.gif

certainly gave napoleon a hard time (oh the rifle is the Baker rifle)

or? :(

how about a mix: http://www.amren.com/974issue/bayonet.gif

certainly gave napoleon a hard time (oh the rifle is the Baker rifle)

Greenjackets for the win!

I'm extending swords to mean blades in general, but it depends on distance.

Within 3 feet of a person in combat, I'd rather have a light sword or knife. Typically, however, getting within 3 feet requires one to be able to attack from a distance.

Unless you can travel through shadows, have a damned good shield or have other means of range attacking, I reckon guns are the more effective approach.

I have more respect for swordsman. To use a sword effectivly takes more skill. Any ol' chap can fire a gun and make it lethal.

I have more respect for swordsman. To use a sword effectivly takes more skill. Any ol' chap can fire a gun and make it lethal.
You'd be surprised at how bad some people's aim is.

You'd be surprised at how bad some people's aim is.

Indeed. See Dumb and Dumber.

More skill to use the sword but I find firing a shotgun so much more fun...

Anyone can swing a sword and make it lethal.

Personally, given a controlled scenario, in which a skilled gunman is pitted against a skilled swordsman, the gunman should win nearly everytime.

I'm not sure about skill but I think it definitely takes more practice to become proficient with swords than with guns.

As for weapons, my favorite is probably my Tippman 98 Custom paintball marker. After all, I'm not out to kill anyone.

Gun!

What kind of crazy question is that?

Each of them has their advantages and disadvantages.

A gun has a much longer range than a sword, but has limited ammo.

A sword doesn't need to be reloaded, but you'd have to be next to the person in order to cause any damage (and it could break).

I'd probably go with the gun.

to master i think a swordis much but, which is funner idsay guns ( at least in a videogame environment)

I have no experience with either, but I would prefer a sword to a gun, because I could be artistic in the I would be defending/killing with the weapon, as opposed to just pointing and firing. Also, I think the sword is simply more romanticized more than the gun, and that tempts me. I admit that it's a kind of macabre art and romance, but I prefer it to the gun.

Which takes more skill, firing a gun or swinging a sword? Or better yet which is funner?

Open to debate.

Here you can type about what is better

Not open to debate.

I would say swords. While it is hard to compare the difficulty of the peak of swordsmanship and marksmanship, as they are forever being pushed higher I would argue that swords require greater skill in that they are not weapons of instant death, and as such require a higher level of expertise to be used lethally effectively. Furthermore, swordplay requires more stamina, and dexterity, and possibly the same reflexes. Also, swordfighting must also take defense into consideration at the same time as offence. Finally, swords look cooler as objects, and in use.

I like swords better, just for asthetic value if not anything else. Also, fighting with a sword is just so much more personal than standing back and shooting someone - You're pretty much next to them for most of the fight.

It's really quite simple. Use both. Sure it'll require practice, but then, if you like getting into fights, why not?

Use the sword once you get close because it can cause so much more damage than a sword (even in non-vital areas), but use a gun to get there.

I think the sword requires more skill to use proficiently. Shooting a gun requires the use of the head, one arm, and some full-body speed. Using a sword, however, requires both arms, both legs, and almost any other conveivable part of the body. It's hard to get all of that well-coodinated.

In a gun vs gun fight, there's a lot of luck involved due to the ballistics of the weapon. In sword vs sword, however, luck plays almost no part.

I think swords mean a lot more to people, though, because it takes a lot of effort to forge a good sword, but guns can me mass-produced.

As to which is more fun: swords, because they can be choreographed much cooler than any gunfight, unless said gunfinght has swords in it.

While it may take more physical kill to become an expert swordsman, think about the sheer mental skill it takes to become an expert marksman, especially in extreme long range shooting (sniping). To be able to hit something at extreme long ranges one requires an almost intimate knowledge of ones weapon, some ability to understand weather conditions and how they affect trajectory and flight time, and a pretty good and relatively instantaaneous knowledge of basic physics. true, you aren't out there with a slide rule and diagrams, but the concepts of trajectory and angle is physics none-the-less. Plus, people who haven't done sniping really don't know just how difficult or intense it is. While I personally have neve done so in combat (only for sport) I've had my grandfather share his experiences in WWII (fought for the germans as a sniper). Some pretty intense experiences which wound up eentually costing him a leg.

SO in the end, I'd say they are both equally difficult. Swordsmanship is more physical, while fighting with guns is more a mental skill.

you might get more satisfaction from plunging a sword into the heart of your enemy...

I think sending someone across a room with a good shot would look cooler

It's comparing apples and oranges. It requires different skill sets for each. And, given different types of blades and guns, different skill sets for types - katanas require different skills than claymores, pistols require different skills than rifles.

Which takes more skill, firing a gun or swinging a sword? Or better yet which is funner?
Here you can type about what is better and which weapon you prefer, and are specific. Do not use words like bombs because there is a lot of different type of bombs. So go on, type.

I can see the appeal and practical uses for a sword but why use it exclusively when you can hit your enemy before he can get he weapon out of his scabbard?

In particular I like the M1911A1 (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg04-e.htm) and for a more compact weapon the Makarov (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg21-e.htm).

If I was going to get into a melee scuffle I'd want either one of these (http://www.stahlhelms.com/Trench1.jpg), or one of these (http://www.weprintcolor.com/stockimages/construction/images/Black%20metal%20crowbar.jpg)

I'd say sword. With a gun you can shoot at someone from a distance, something that's more for a coward. A sword, on the other hand (unless you can throw really hard and really well I guess) is more a close combat thing and I personally think that to be efficient with a sword you'd need greater skill. There's always that it gives you some more excerise too:p

I should qualify the following by saying that I have fenced for almost 8 years (nearly half my life) and have never fired a gun.
I much prefer swords. They require the user to train for many hours a week to be used effectively. It required a more diverse range of skills. And it requires a high degree of physical and mental fitness. This being said the range does suck.

give me a M2 or MTPU heavy machine gun with 10 belts of ammo, and I will dispose of 1000 of the worlds finest swordsmen/fencers for you In under 10 minutes or your money back.

I'd say sword. With a gun you can shoot at someone from a distance, something that's more for a coward. A sword, on the other hand (unless you can throw really hard and really well I guess)

Believe me, there is not point in throwing a sword as often the point of balance on the blade (although this varies tremendously) is frequently towards the hilt/tsuba/guard/whatever therefore making the hilt the most likely part of the sword to hit the object you are throwing it at.

No stupid 'Last Samurai' throw a Katana from 30 yards with pint point accuracy through the enemy general bollocks.

I'd say sword. With a gun you can shoot at someone from a distance, something that's more for a coward.

The above statement is the "Be All, End All" of statements! Nothing else need be said!

It's comparing apples and oranges. It requires different skill sets for each. And, given different types of blades and guns, different skill sets for types - katanas require different skills than claymores, pistols require different skills than rifles.

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/322/7291/931/a

Simple, which is most effective? As many have said; firearms.

Which would I take to any fight (bar ones under water etc etc)? A gun.

Why? Range, plus close combat ability, esp. with a pistol or revolver means it easily beats a sword in any sphere of combat bar a few exceptional circumstances.


Which do i train with? Swords (Lichtenauer School of German Longsword).

Why? Keeps me fight, mentally alert, you make friends. Its like many martial arts, very few parts are usable in all circumstances but there are parts which prove very useful.

Would I ever use a sword in combat? Don't kid yourself. If there is going to be a swordfight I don't doubt that near enough all participants will come away with wounds of some kind. Too many double hits and bad parries/counters happen frequently.

Which requires more skill? Stupid question. They require different skills. Any marksmen of an exceptional calbire has to keep a very low heartbeat, whereas a swords man of any kind has to keep themselves agile. Both require fitness. Both require hand to eye coordination and dexterity. They are different yet similar, but incomparable in terms of skill.

I say

Melee combat is more a indepth proficiency
Firearms is more 'connective' profciency

swords dont run out of bullets but how long can you hack a machette for?

Any hand to hand is going to be more involved.

Firearms is all trajectory aiming speed and cover, trajectory taking into account weather conditions.. aiming speed being weapon degrees of firing open size of target speed of target, speed of targeter in moving target, speed of bullet comparitive. Ranged combat is more 'physics based' and I think that the options are largel based, is the opposition aware, are they holding the position are they trying to advance or retreat, etc.. where can they advance or retreat to, what defences do they have etc.. what objects are around that can be used to enhance firepower what is the role of the fire etc.. etc..

swordplay is more along the lines of what type of weapons does the other have, what are their movement capacities killing ranges, contact ranges what position do they need to be in to use the weapon, how fast is the weapon what body points can be attacked depending on the reason for attack what body points will be lethal or debilitating, what are my options for attack based upon their options for attack and my required defence.

Of course ranged combat has all the elements of melee combat, I still sense though that a swordfight would be more 'contact' oriented, where as firefights you may have a little more time to think withouth 'total' pressure of having the implement of the kill two feet away from you.. firefights are 'bigger' lethality, a soilder should always have 360 mental vision.

The difference if someone has a gun around you you do not get into range or line of sight.. you manover to put them in yours... as for melee you really dont have a choice.. either you get into range of them.. perhaps with 3 feet hopefully you have a long weapon or are more agile.

Simply firing a gun is easier than swinging a sword but only minutely.. modern combat integrates all the elements of ancient combat therefore it is more involved.. but melee combat requires greater proficiency and skill 'generally' then ranged combat. IMO ranged combat is fairly simple in a perfect world you give two people the same guns and los both people are dead minus the hair of time in who pulls the trigger faster.. or for that matter they might both.. or perhaps who can drop to the ground in less than a second.

As for swords there is no cover either you block/parry or attack them every parry is an attack and ever attack is a parry.

so melee requires more proficiency modern combat requires more proficiency then ancient combat.

Anyone can swing a sword and make it lethal.

Personally, given a controlled scenario, in which a skilled gunman is pitted against a skilled swordsman, the gunman should win nearly everytime.
In your above scenario, it would almost always result in a draw. The swordsman would simply refuse to engage.

I have trained with swords for 15+ years (SCA) and have competitively shot pistols for 5+ years (local "bowling" leagues). Both weapons are extremely easy to use and be leathal.. Both weapons require a lot of practice to use with proficiency.

In your above scenario, it would almost always result in a draw. The swordsman would simply refuse to engage.

I have trained with swords for 15+ years (SCA) and have competitively shot pistols for 5+ years (local "bowling" leagues). Both weapons are extremely easy to use and be leathal.. Both weapons require a lot of practice to use with proficiency.

SCA?

Did you use Rattan or actual steel as they are both very different when it comes to sword dynamics and what you can do with them.

Well of all handguns there is one that catches my eye time and time again. Not so practical a weapon, the most powerful handgun in existence. It is the M500 Smith and Wesson Revolver, which is the biggest handgun I've ever seen. It has a full eight inch barrel, along with huge cylinder and handgrip. Nevertheless, the rounds are so large calaber only five can be fitted in at once. A hunting pistol that can bring down any man, beast, or light vehicle on this earth, I present the magnum of magnums, the M500:

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f297/TheoneandonlyDizzy/TNK-SWM500-HW-BK-L.jpg
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f297/TheoneandonlyDizzy/163500_large.jpg

The kick on that must be massive.

Your shoulder must dissappear out your back if you don't hold that right...

Whoever said that a gun only requires a small amount of your body whereas the sword requires more has obviously never shot an assualt rifle or a target rifle. Accurate assualt rifle fire requires the muscles of the entire body to control recoil and maintain the aiming point. I have gotten extremely good at rapid firing my AK-47 and staying on target from a distance of around 50 yards. Single shots I can put on the paper fromm 100 yard free hand, further with a prop. Competitive rifle shooting also takes more physical prowess than many give credit for. Many of the shooting positions are difficult to maintain, and stressful at the same time. Sure a sword might look cool or be useful in a very limited role in todays society, but give me my AK and my Beretta anyday of the week over a sword!

Which takes more skill, firing a gun or swinging a sword? Or better yet which is funner?
Here you can type about what is better and which weapon you prefer, and are specific. Do not use words like bombs because there is a lot of different type of bombs. So go on, type.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I like Brazos Custom Pro SC Series handgun. Its cool looking and sleek, that’s why I like it.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.brazoscustom.com/Images/ProLim.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.brazoscustom.com/&h=286&w=400&sz=42&tbnid=zudUCZ-1pgGgWM:&tbnh=85&tbnw=120&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhandguns%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DX
DUDE THIS IS OLD! The other one had a poll if I recall, so post one for heaven's sake!

SCA?

Did you use Rattan or actual steel as they are both very different when it comes to sword dynamics and what you can do with them.
I use both. Steel for form and body mechanics and rattan for full contact. I find that rattan can make a person lazy because edge control is not as critical as with steel. So they take shortcuts without making sure that they are on target with their edge.

I fence saber competitively (just against other fencing clubs in my state and those surrounding it, not NCAA or anything) and I shoot (though that's not competitive at all, just for fun). I like to think a sword (saber) requires more skill to learn to use effectively. It's also more fun because you can actually deflect enemy attacks and whatnot. If you're going for fun factor: swords are the way to go. If you want to outright kill someone efficiently: use a gun. In almost any concievable combat situation at any range, I pick gun simply because real life isn't like an FPS where ammo is really a consideration. If you're even moderately skilled, you'll hit your opponet once and that's all it takes. If you're fighting hoardes of opponets... well, how often does one REALLY fight hoardes of opponets outside of an FPS game or bad movie? So yeah, answer to question: advanced use of a sword requires a great deal of skill, although advanced use of a gun would require an equal amount of skill depending on what you're doing. However, basic swordmanship is more difficult than basic use of a handgun, I think that's easy to agree upon.

They (the mythic 'They') all used to say "Turn swords into ploughshares", well how about we convert firearms to bladed weapons, as the necessary first step to global peace.

Let us take all the AK-47s, Magnums, Glocks, yeah, even up to artillary and howitzer size, and convert them all (with the necessary metallurgical skills, and obviously not all guns are of suitable metal or even metal) into fine examples of swords.

We could brand these made-from-gun blades as "Ex-Calibre".


(Oh dear, oh dear, so much written for one poor pun... However much I'd find it an agreeable transition. ;)

Unlike the Sesame Street songs, which are short and pointless, but are still effective as a weapon, it would seem. And a fairly horrendous weapon too.

Another highly effective makeshift weapon is a section of Hot Wheels track.

SMACK!

I think the sesame street songs are more deadly though!

Daggers with some poison... A crossbow with poisoned bolts... :D

FIREBALLS! :p

Sorry, D&D player here, I don't like swords cuz I play as Wizard. :p

I use both. Steel for form and body mechanics and rattan for full contact. I find that rattan can make a person lazy because edge control is not as critical as with steel. So they take shortcuts without making sure that they are on target with their edge.

Good good. I'm usually wary of SCA people who claim they can sword fight, as many have only ever used ratten which doesn't handle quite the same, hence why I asked. :)

snip

Agreed.

Have you ever done any historical fencing with sabre yet, or do you concentrate wholly on sport fencing?

They (the mythic 'They') all used to say "Turn swords into ploughshares", well how about we convert firearms to bladed weapons, as the necessary first step to global peace.

Let us take all the AK-47s, Magnums, Glocks, yeah, even up to artillary and howitzer size, and convert them all (with the necessary metallurgical skills, and obviously not all guns are of suitable metal or even metal) into fine examples of swords.

We could brand these made-from-gun blades as "Ex-Calibre".


(Oh dear, oh dear, so much written for one poor pun... However much I'd find it an agreeable transition. ;)

You see that over there?

*Points*

Yeah, thats tumbleweed :p

I once did competitive Epee (my knees won't take it anymore), and combined with my military experience, I would say it takes much more skill and practice to be effective with a blade than with a gun.

Historically, this is why guns took over from bows and blades - it takes a year to make a good swordsman; it takes a lifetime to make a good longbowman; it takes six weeks to teach any old idiot to shoot a gun.

All that said, I'll take my Sig into a fight over any sort of blade.

Gunblade > All.

http://www.ruble-enterprises.com/PFsword.htm

I fence saber competitively (just against other fencing clubs in my state and those surrounding it, not NCAA or anything)


Pfft. Weapon of chimps.

La fleuret pour moi.

Why not combine them both and use a bayonet/longblade bullets? ;)

Although imoz, this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/The_Freethinkers/DoujinBBCNsmall.jpg) blows both straight out of the water (literally). :p

The kick on that must be massive.

Your shoulder must dissappear out your back if you don't hold that right...

Well you'd think so, but smith and wesson have done an excelent taming the recoil with a compensator and a slightly spongy handgrip etc.

Kellarly- I only do sport fencing. I've never done any SCA or historical fencing. I imagine it'd be fun, but sport is really all I've had experience with.

I think sending someone across a room with a good shot would look cooler

You know that's a myth, right?

Both are primitive forms of fighting that require actual concentration. Hail to thee, Napalm!

Which takes more skill, firing a gun or swinging a sword? Or better yet which is funner?
Here you can type about what is better and which weapon you prefer, and are specific. Do not use words like bombs because there is a lot of different type of bombs. So go on, type.

I like both, but if you bring a sword to a gun fight, your death will look really cool!

Why not combine them both and use a bayonet/longblade bullets? ;)

Although imoz, this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/The_Freethinkers/DoujinBBCNsmall.jpg) blows both straight out of the water (literally). :p

That thing ain't makin' it through the canal. It might even be able to beach itself on the continental shelf. What are those, 300-inch guns?

Kellarly- I only do sport fencing. I've never done any SCA or historical fencing. I imagine it'd be fun, but sport is really all I've had experience with.


Heh, cool. If you ever get a chance, take it, you'll love it. And all those guards that I would guess you learnt when you started, that aren't any real use in Sabre, be prepared to use em, they actually do work with a proper sword.

Heh, cool. If you ever get a chance, take it, you'll love it. And all those guards that I would guess you learnt when you started, that aren't any real use in Sabre, be prepared to use em, they actually do work with a proper sword.

Oddly, had some recent exposure to iai-do, and there's a lot of work that concerns delaying or preventing a close opponent from drawing or using their sword at hand.

A lot of talk in this thread has been about how good a sword can be up close - knowing how to prevent someone from drawing their weapon - long enough to get yours out and kill them - seems to be a useful skill.

I'd rather hold someone's sword in its scabbard long enough to draw my weapon (of any kind) and kill them. Probably a lot less wear and tear on me than trying to block and parry.

Pfft. Weapon of chimps.

La fleuret pour moi.

Give me a real sabre and I'll teach you that it is a weapon of grace combined with power.

Give me a real sabre and I'll teach you that it is a weapon of grace combined with power.
No, you'll show him how a person can be cut quite a few times without killing them.

That thing ain't makin' it through the canal. It might even be able to beach itself on the continental shelf. What are those, 300-inch guns?
No, 30". Just a little smaller than the largest field gun ever built. Plus it can hold up to 4,608 strategic-length nuclear cruise missiles, so it can simply use a few to widen the canal a bit to sail through. :p

You have to admit a gun or sword won't do much damage against 1500mm+ of armour...

how bout the gunblade from final fantasy VIII?

=P

soz haha

Oddly, had some recent exposure to iai-do, and there's a lot of work that concerns delaying or preventing a close opponent from drawing or using their sword at hand.

A lot of talk in this thread has been about how good a sword can be up close - knowing how to prevent someone from drawing their weapon - long enough to get yours out and kill them - seems to be a useful skill.

I'd rather hold someone's sword in its scabbard long enough to draw my weapon (of any kind) and kill them. Probably a lot less wear and tear on me than trying to block and parry.

True, but that means closing very quickly and often (esp. middle ages esp.) there were only partial scabbards, so no real need to draw. Besides Iai-do was a duelling art no? Hence it is only set from a certain distance so it more capable at that distance. You get within 10 feet of me, my sword will be drawn.

No, you'll show him how a person can be cut quite a few times without killing them.

1796 LC sabre doesn't do cuts. It does dismemberment. It'll kill him. The edge kills as well as the point as long as you use it right. The point has its disadvantages as much as the edge.

sword is...... better....... me and a friend have a standing joke which is based on swords in modern military. all i have to do is say 'not this time private' and he busts up lafin, turns around and pretends to pull something from behind his back, and gets this fiendish grin on his face. a gun to me is.... fun. however a sword meens honor which a gun lacks. this is all a gun is to me :mp5: . a sword takes skill, strength, and determination. i say sword. i meen a short sord. a great sword to me isnt a sword...... its more of a thing you swing around you like a fan blade...... i used to not be a sword fan, im still realy not. personly i find a spear more fun. ive seen an array of.... odd weapons. if anyone watches Conquest on the history chanel, you would see some. what i want to carry into battle is either a bow or a glaive type polearm, mayb a halbeird? i duno though. guns to me are just not honorable. my father is an avid colecter of old style guns, those have style! i got to shoot his colt python the other day. god it felt orgasmic.......... ive never shot one of his rifles b4. i wana stick to handguns though. also a simple 1 shot 22 cal w/ a scope. its the funnest thing youl ever shoot............. but back on subject, sword=more honorable and more skillfull, gun=more easy to deal with less skillfull. sword=hafto be sober, gun=can use while drunk, lol.

Czardas, what in the name of all holy hell is that ship? Tell me no one actually thought to build something like that! Where did the concept even come from? Please, tell me everything you know about it--I'm very curious/overwhelmed.

And all this reminds me of the old joke (which is also pretty much my response):

A soldier is sitting at a bar wearing a shirt that says "Marines suck".

Sure enough, two marines walk up.�

One of the Marines says, "WHAT DOES THAT SHIRT SAY!?!?!?!"

So the soldier responds, "thats the first thing I hate about Marines, they cant read."

The other Marine growles, "What did you say!?!"

The soldier responds, "Thats the second thing I hate about Marines, they cant hear."

Then the first Marine demands that they take this outside.

Two minutes� later the soldier walks back into the bar unharmed. The bartender askes what happened to the two Marines.

The army guy responds, "Thats the third thing I hate about Marines, they bring knives to gunfights."

Considering I haven't practiced with a bladed weapon in 10 years and haven't practiced with a firearm in a lot longer, plus my bad eyesight, I'll take a 12 gauge with 00 over a blade.

The gun may be the more lethal weapon at long range, but up close I *think* it would be more difficult to hit a moving target with a pistol, because even a novice swordsman learns the important of staying mobile. However consider the following: if one guy with an assault rifle stared down fifty guys with swords, no one would be surprised. If one guy with a sword stared down one guy with an assault rifle-- and I'm sure there are swordsmen with the confidence and poise to do it-- that's something to be awed by.
While it might not make the sword the more effective weapon, it certainly confers some real power and dignity to the blade.

Also, if you want to look at *efficiency,* the sword is a relatively simple instrument that can function in any environment-- space permitting-- and retains its lethality, in almost anyone's hands, as long as it's sharp. A gun, by comparison, is a complicated device that can jam, get buggered up by its environment, run out of bullets (rendering it about as deadly as a heavy club), and depends on the user knowing how to flip the safety switch.

Czardas, what in the name of all holy hell is that ship? Tell me no one actually thought to build something like that! Where did the concept even come from? Please, tell me everything you know about it--I'm very curious/overwhelmed.
That is one of the most famous ships ever planned, the "Doujin" Class Super-Dreadnaught. It was designed by The Freethinkers to serve as the capital ship of Doujin's navy. At the time it was built, it was the largest and most powerful warship ever to sail the seven seas, and was designed as such -- to intimidate smaller nations and navies, to serve as a symbol of national pride, and to provide a platform for ballistic missile launch, shore bombardment, and aircraft launch in one. The Doujin is no longer in production, but at least 16 exist in the navies of some older nations. Rest assured that nobody ever dreamed of building such a ridiculous length of steel penis in real life. ;)

Nonetheless, it certainly outclasses your everyday guns and swords, and would thus be my weapon of choice. ;)

That is one of the most famous ships ever planned, the "Doujin" Class Super-Dreadnaught. It was designed by The Freethinkers to serve as the capital ship of Doujin's navy. At the time it was built, it was the largest and most powerful warship ever to sail the seven seas, and was designed as such -- to intimidate smaller nations and navies, to serve as a symbol of national pride, and to provide a platform for ballistic missile launch, shore bombardment, and aircraft launch in one. The Doujin is no longer in production, but at least 16 exist in the navies of some older nations. Rest assured that nobody ever dreamed of building such a ridiculous length of steel penis in real life. ;)

Nonetheless, it certainly outclasses your everyday guns and swords, and would thus be my weapon of choice. ;)

Your uber boat would get owned by Halley's Comet (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/9612/halley_hmc_big.gif). Comets FTW!

Well, so what! A few of these (http://solar.physics.montana.edu/YPOP/Spotlight/Tour/images/the_changing_sun.gif) render comets nothingness! Bwahaha!!!

Well, so what! A few of these (http://solar.physics.montana.edu/YPOP/Spotlight/Tour/images/the_changing_sun.gif) render comets nothingness! Bwahaha!!!
Beat this biatch, Black Hole (http://www.iac.es/gabinete/noticias/2001/imagenes/gbhole1.jpg). I'll eat your sun for breakfast, mwahaha.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.100megsfree2.com/deadeye/specials/realgunpics/desert-eagle_357_manik-bob.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.100megsfree2.com/deadeye/specials/realguns_AUF.html&h=219&w=400&sz=9&tbnid=UyY5yFjf7tff5M:&tbnh=65&tbnw=120&hl=en&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Diac%2Bdefender%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DDVXA,DVXA:2005-10,DVXA:en%26sa%3DN

The IAC defender has got to be the best handgun. It is soo powerfull. It can penetrate Kevlar body armour with one shot. ow.:mp5:

It takes more skill to wield a sword and use it proficiently. Guns don't require nearly as much in the ways of balance control etc. Don't get me wrong to fire a gun accurately you have to have these things, but not nearly on the level as you do with swords.

I think it requires the most willpower and the greatest amount of skill not to use a weapon at all.



I bow to you for modest opinion which will differ enormously from the dick waving we're bound to see in this thread.

Swords are definitly, the ones who use the most skill. its wicked hard to use some blades properly...

and as far as honor goes, I'd still use the sword, just becvause you know your a badass when you can say:

"yea...I brought a knife to a gunfight...and walked away!"

But If you could combind the lethality of guns with the skill of a sword...
can anyone say walking slaughterhouse?
the Movie Equilibrium, with the Grammaton Clerics. well that would be pretty much amazing...

the Movie Equilibrium, with the Grammaton Clerics. well that would be pretty much amazing...

Yeah, but how bad at aiming were those bloody guards. Its one person and 30 of them have AUTOMATIC ASSAULT RIFLES FFS. yet they miss.

It's not going to happen, but it would be feckin cool.

The one in my pants!!!

Woohooo!






















...i'm so embarassed now...

I believe that the grace and style of the katana, puts it above the use of any gun.

I'm not saying that guns don't have their own kind of beauty, they do, they just don't measure up in my eyes.

Besides, it takes a whole lot more nerve to stand beside someone and knowingly swing the blade and feel it cutting through the bone and tissue. That is something that guns will NEVER come close to.

Quit stealing my lightbulb shit. Get your own name-recognition ploy.

I believe that the grace and style of the katana, puts it above the use of any gun.

I hope you are not excluding other swords from that statement.

I hope you are not excluding other swords from that statement.


Not at all, I actually have 6 or 7 different kinds in my collection, but none seem to match the simple beauty that I see in the katana.

I merely enjoy the look of a well crafted katana above others. Personal preference.

Not at all, I actually have 6 or 7 different kinds in my collection, but none seem to match the simple beauty that I see in the katana.

I merely enjoy the look of a well crafted katana above others. Personal preference.

Fair enough :)

I just get a nervous twitch after the "Knight vs. Samurai" when Katana-Fanboys start going on about why they are the ULTIMATE BEST EVER GOD LIKE SWORD.

Quit stealing my lightbulb shit. Get your own name-recognition ploy.
'Cause you're obviously the first one to use that icon at the start of every thread. And you own the forum, so naturally you can dictate who may and may not utilise the various icons.

Yeah. :rolleyes:

On a more serious note, I also agree with Terrorist Cakes. It requires more courage and willpower not to use violence at all, than to go around randomly shooting and stabbing people. Which is one reason it's been so many aeons since I last committed mass genocide of entire galaxies. ;)

'Cause you're obviously the first one to use that icon at the start of every thread. And you own the forum, so naturally you can dictate who may and may not utilise the various icons.

Yeah. :rolleyes:

On a more serious note, I also agree with Terrorist Cakes. It requires more courage and willpower not to use violence at all, than to go around randomly shooting and stabbing people. Which is one reason it's been so many aeons since I last committed mass genocide of entire galaxies. ;)

Wait, the genocide of galaxies, or the genocide of people within the galaxy by destroying the galaxy?

Wait, the genocide of galaxies, or the genocide of people within the galaxy by destroying the galaxy?

Both. Its' Czardas.

Both. Its' Czardas.
Truth. I kill the galaxy and everything within it, sometimes slowly by draining it via black hole. XD

But that's beside the point. I'm learning to control my urges to do that kind of thing because a truly wise ruler battles with his tongue, not his fist. (Not in that way... pervs.) Or was that the pen ad not the AK-101? ¬_¬

Truth. I kill the galaxy and everything within it, sometimes slowly by draining it via black hole. XD

But that's beside the point. I'm learning to control my urges to do that kind of thing because a truly wise ruler battles with his tongue, not his fist. (Not in that way... pervs.) Or was that the pen ad not the AK-101? ¬_¬

Well, you still haven't got me yet :p

*pokes Czardas repeatedly*

I see your therapy went well as I am still alive.

Obviously guns are easier to use and require less training, point and pull doesnt take the skill you need to harm someone who is able to defend himself with a sharp metal object against yours. The aspect of parrying is simply not a part of gunfights, you need not seek for holes in the defense and defend at the same time.
That being said, guns are more effective in most circumstances.

Gunblades...

We're comparing apples and oranges. Anyone can swing a sword, and anyone can fire a gun. To do so with proficiency is an entirely different matter.

Movies and TV have us believing that firing a gun and hitting zombie in the head from 50 feet can be done by even the most ignorant novice on the first shot. I've witnessed people that have been shooting for years and they can't hit the broad side of a barn with a rifle at 100 yards. A rifle that is capable of grouping 2 inches, and they are lucky to hit the 2 foot square target down range.

Entertainment seems to generally give swords and blades a slightly better picture of reality, in that the main characters typically have years of training and experience.

In battle, the gun will most certainly win at long ranges (more than 5 yards). In CQB, the odds will balance out a little, but I think the gun would still be on top. This is assuming all parties are highly skilled in each art.

Well, you still haven't got me yet :p

*pokes Czardas repeatedly*

I see your therapy went well as I am still alive.
For that I will suffer you a grievous injury!

SEE? HE'S OFFLINE! I SENT HIM OFFLINE! /dances/

[j/k]

For that I will suffer you a grievous injury!

SEE? HE'S OFFLINE! I SENT HIM OFFLINE! /dances/

[j/k]


Ahem :p

Entertainment seems to generally give swords and blades a slightly better picture of reality, in that the main characters typically have years of training and experience.

Yet still shows them being used incorrectly...

*mutters*Kingdom of Heaven, Last Samurai, Sharpe*mutters*

Gunblades...
bah that's the first thing i thought of after reading the thread title.

turns out gunblades were real, i never knew. collection of them at the Royal Ontario Museum.

Don't badmouth Sharpe.

*glare*

Ahem :p
Meh.

Don't badmouth Sharpe.

*glare*

I love Sharpe, but the fact they can't but a decent sword fight together (esp. in the most recent one) drives me insane, esp. given the amount of period sabre manuals that are around.

Pffft, couldn't care less about historical inconsistencies in the saber-fighting styles, really. It's all about Sharpemaster Pwnage.

I have more respect for swordsman. To use a sword effectivly takes more skill. Any ol' chap can fire a gun and make it lethal.

see, any old bonehead can swing a sword, but that doesnt mean that a sword takes any less skill to use CORRECTLY than a firearm, sazy like a Sniper Rifle, that is a weapon that requires Precision and Patience to use does it not? they each require different skills, but i beleive that man is more afriad of the death he cannot see coming than the death he can see plain as day, so ill have to say Firearms.

Pffft, couldn't care less about historical inconsistencies in the saber-fighting styles, really. It's all about Sharpemaster Pwnage.

There is that :D Firing a Baker rifle is fun ;)

Fire weaponry.

A shiny, unsheathed sword looks troubling, but frightening to its opponents only at a short range.

The crack of a pistol sends people crouching or running for cover, everywhere. Only the most battle-hardened gunfighters will not feel weakness in their knees when shot rings out.

Death could come from any corner.

Flamethrower. Pure elemental fear! Try charging at somebody who can spray 50 feet of liquid fire at you when all you have is a sharp metal bar :D

Only the most battle-hardened gunfighters will not feel weakness in their knees when shot rings out.

Assuming their not hit ;)

Sword. Swords can stop bullets, if wielded both A) expertly and B) really cool. Swords can cut through guns. Swords don't run out of ammo.

Sword. Swords can stop bullets, if wielded both A) expertly and B) really cool. Swords can cut through guns. Swords don't run out of ammo.

I'll take a bet they can't stop bullets.

You stand 15 feet away with a sword and I'll stand here with my Desert Eagle.

I have a good idea who will lose.

Swords can't cut through guns neither. They were never designed to and never will be able to. Unless you wish to take a rather hefty chisel and a power hammer cutting through a gun is going to be rather hard, esp considering the toughness of the gun barrel. The pressures they have to take are tremendous as well as having to stand heat caused by the bullets cicrling on the rifling. In other words, tougher than any sword could cut through.

Why not both (http://www.sanjuanenterprise.com/products.htm)?

Swords are more fun to practice with, for me at least, but I also favor guns for the obvious advantages they provide..

Why not both (http://www.sanjuanenterprise.com/products.htm)?

Swords are more fun to practice with, for me at least, but I also favor guns for the obvious advantages they provide..

There are old school ones like this too...

http://img456.imageshack.us/img456/1212/dscf10500uo.jpg


German Hunting sword from the late 16th Century. Nice.

Just put a bayonet on every gun and a small gun on every sword and everyone will be happy.

Or a gun that shoots swords...

There's a saying that I think is relevent to this conversation: "God made all men. Sam Colt made them equal."

Of course it takes more skill -- and more physical ability -- to use a sword proficiently, especially for more than a few minutes at a time; swinging around a sword is pretty tiring. That's one of the great advantages of the personal repeating firearm -- it gives anyone, no matter how young, how old, or how infirm, the ability to defend themselves from an assailant, no matter how large, fast or powerful that attacker is.

Sword. Swords can stop bullets,
It depends on whether your sword is made out of tungsten carbide covered with a layer of artificial diamonds or not.

Pffft. It doesn't matter. If you have an M82 anti-material rifle, I very much doubt even an uberskilled swordsman could stop a bullet from that :)

Pffft. It doesn't matter. If you have an M82 anti-material rifle, I very much doubt even an uberskilled swordsman could stop a bullet from that :)
True. Not to mention the 406mm guns on the Iowa, or hell, even a 127mm field gun, both of which would render a sword worthless no matter what it was made of.

I prefer explosives myself. A more satisfying boom, to be sure.

I've always been a big fan of pistols and knives as well.

True. Not to mention the 406mm guns on the Iowa, or hell, even a 127mm field gun, both of which would render a sword worthless no matter what it was made of.

Hell, why not the Babylon supergun Iraq was going to build? Stop that, Mr. Swashbuckle >: )

Hell, why not the Babylon supergun Iraq was going to build? Stop that, Mr. Swashbuckle >: )
'Xactly. Or nukular shells. Stick a warhead inside a say 762mm sabot, and fire it out of Little David, the largest mortar ever built (that was actually used). W00t.

Screw it. Use the Tsar Cannon, the largest howitzer ever built. 890mm. See if a flimsy little metal stick can deflect a solid cast iron ball that big :D

Swords required more technique, but guns require more repetitive skill, especially guns like single action revolvers.

Ideally, I'd carry one of those gunswords; no, not the cheap thing from FF8. They actually used to make gunswords, with a gun instead of a handle, and a shaft in the blade for the bullet to fire through.

Автомат Калашникова образца 1947 года

Автомат Калашникова образца 1947 года

I can read that. I'm special.

I can read that. I'm special.

Good.

Something to do with the AK47, I think, pure guess based on that looking a lot like Avtomat Kalashnikova 1947.

Swords required more technique, but guns require more repetitive skill, especially guns like single action revolvers.

Ideally, I'd carry one of those gunswords; no, not the cheap thing from FF8. They actually used to make gunswords, with a gun instead of a handle, and a shaft in the blade for the bullet to fire through.

You mean like the one I posted on the previous page? ;)

You mean like the one I posted on the previous page? ;)

Well, yeah. I didn't read the topic >_>

Why not both? M4A1 Colt in one hand Long Sword in the other.