Why are swords "better" than guns?

[listerlee]

blade is better because we don't have to reload it..

[carolyn07]

...for me,.swords are really better than guns even though guns kill faster than swords,.

coz i feel that when you cut things with swords,.it has the feeling of uhmm....

completeness i guess?,.

hahahah!,.♥

[carolyn07]

...for me,.swords are really better than guns even though guns kill faster than swords,.

coz i feel that when you cut things with swords,.it has the feeling of uhmm....

completeness i guess?,.

hahahah!,.♥

[Dragon_Of_]

swords DO require more skill.. since when can you take someone out from miles away with a sword? yes it takes some skill to use a gun, but not much. with a sword you need to get up-close-and-personal, and hope the perosn doesn't notice what you're trying to do. lets see you actually kill someone and look into their eyes as you lay the final blow... i bet it'll change someone forever. guns make murder to simple and les personal that it should be. ut then again, someone can be killed quite easily with a piece of paper... so that just goes to show ya how weak the human body is.

i've got something that trumps them all, though:

YouTube - the Father Of All Bombs official test video

Close

2You need to upgrade your Flash Player2

yes that's right, you've heard of the mother of all bombs, but this is THE FATHER OF ALL BOMBS... you've gotta take you're hat off to us pathetic humans; we seem determined to kill off our whole species as violently as possible.

edit: however as honroabe as swords are; guns are just more efficent.. not as effecient as M.O.A.B. or F.O.A.B. but htere's over 11,000 deaths a year just in the US from guns.. how many with a sword these days?

so while swords are more honorable and cooler, a gun is just more efficent.

[SteyrAUG]

Originally Posted by listerlee

blade is better because we don't have to reload it..

How hard is it to read the 1st post?

Originally Posted by carolyn07

...for me,.swords are really better than guns even though guns kill faster than swords,.

coz i feel that when you cut things with swords,.it has the feeling of uhmm....

completeness i guess?,.

hahahah!,.♥

Bayonets

Originally Posted by Dragon_Of_

swords DO require more skill.. since when can you take someone out from miles away with a sword? yes it takes some skill to use a gun, but not much. with a sword you need to get up-close-and-personal, and hope the perosn doesn't notice what you're trying to do. lets see you actually kill someone and look into their eyes as you lay the final blow... i bet it'll change someone forever. guns make murder to simple and les personal that it should be. ut then again, someone can be killed quite easily with a piece of paper... so that just goes to show ya how weak the human body is.

i've got something that trumps them all, though:

YouTube - the Father Of All Bombs official test video

Close

2You need to upgrade your Flash Player2

yes that's right, you've heard of the mother of all bombs, but this is THE FATHER OF ALL BOMBS... you've gotta take you're hat off to us pathetic humans; we seem determined to kill off our whole species as violently as possible.

edit: however as honroabe as swords are; guns are just more efficent.. not as effecient as M.O.A.B. or F.O.A.B. but htere's over 11,000 deaths a year just in the US from guns.. how many with a sword these days?

so while swords are more honorable and cooler, a gun is just more efficent.

Miles away is still bullshit even for a gun. 1.5 miles is the longest confirmed kill with a rifle. Anyway even at that range even the smallest variable can make you miss.

A person can be killed with a piece of paper? Really? How so? Paper can't cut deep nor does it have much striking force. I did see the paper crossbow on myth busters, but there was a plastic arrowhead making the killing and that was made of more than 1 piece of paper.

As for the "silent kill" and "honor" bullshit arguments read the first post.

Over 11,000 deaths from guns in America annually? I'd like to see proof of that. I always hear this that and the other statistic for firearm related death.

[genesis666]

Originally Posted by SteyrAUG

It seems like many people think that swords are superior to guns. It seems like these numbers are higher in anime fans. For those of you who believe that the sword is a better weapon please explain.

NOTE: I do not mean to say that ALL anime fans are like this. I know they are not. If you are going to reply with an argument please read the whole first post.


1. Swords are more honorable than guns.
In a kill or be killed situation honor is one of the last things you need to worry about. Just shooting someone is just as honorable as sneeking up behind someone and slitting their throat.

2. Guns are inhumane.
This is a common misconception I have encountered. A bullet wound that rips the heart open is still more humane than slashing open your enemys abdomen and letting their entrails spill out.

3. Guns run out of ammo, but swords don't.
Only an idiot would run out of ammo with a rifle then let a swordsman chop their head off. It's just common sense that the rifle can be used as a club. While swords can in theory cut through bone it is hard if not impossible to cut through a wooden stock in one swing. Anyone who has chopped firewood can tell you that slicing with the grain of the wood is a damn site easier than chopping against the grain. Stocks and barrels are replaceable. A skull is not.

4. I can block bullets with my sword.
I'll throw you a bone here. This is theoretically possible. I have seen it done before. A sword is set up in a clamp, and a gun was set up in another clamp and carefully aimed at the sword. Upon discharge the bullet hit the blade and sliced in two. This is where theoretic ends and reality begins. The sword itself is capable of stopping the bullet, but the human element is where it fails. If someone 50 yards away has a beretta 92f and they shoot at you then in about the time it takes to blink the bullet will have made it from the gun to you. You will not have enough time to plan the trajectory let alone move the sword in place.

5. Guns are noisy, swords are silent.
When you try to chop off a head you will find quite a bit of noise generated. It can just about be comparable to a gun with a sound suppressor.

5b. I don't have to chop off the head. All I have to do is slash the throat.
Once again we go to the good soldier/dumb soldier. A smart soldier carries a knife just in case so they too can slit throats.

6. You don't need skill to use a gun.
With 10 km/h wind heading 162 degrees, you are facing heading 24 degrees, your elevation is 110 meters above the target and the target is 1.2 kilometers away do you think you could hit them in one shot? At that kind of distance every variable counts. It takes quite a bit of calculation where as with a sword you just swing away.

6b. Swords still take more skill to master than guns.
Granted that shooting someone from 10 meters is easy this argument is still invalid. If an "easy" weapon gets the job done better than the "difficult" weapon then the benefits are two fold. Go ahead and train for 15 years to be a master swordsman and let some 15 year old african kid shoot you down with an AK47.

7. lolololol gunblades!!!!!1111one
The concept of a gun and a blade combined is a good idea. We call those bayonets. The gunblade of final fantasy 8 was a horrible design. There is no barrel and therefore no path for the bullet to travel. When you pull the trigger it will explode. Also the handle of the blade is to terribly placed along with the blade being too heavy it would be difficult if not impossible to master.

Conclusion: Swords as the only weapon are obsolete. Their days of glory are gone. I still think that the blade has it's place on the battlefield and always will, but not as the primary weapon.

Any other arguments I find might be added here later.

i actually prefer guns to swords because with guns u can cause a whole lot more destruction, u can destroy buildings with a rocket launcher but suckwith a sword all thats left is a few scratches really, they suck

[genesis666]

guns forever baby! guns are much easier to use than swords because theres no swingin it about and theres a good chance u wont take ur own arm off

[Ryuuzaki]

Originally Posted by genesis666

theres a good chance u wont take ur own arm off

Yeah, but with guns you can end up shooting yourself. In fact, it's easier to kill yourself with a gun then it is with a sword. With a sword you need force to be able to chop through skin, muscle, and bone, but with a gun, all it needs is a little force on the trigger, and it can go through all of that.

For me it's guns. Guns have a lot more destruction then swords, are a lot simpler to use. With swords (as Genesis said) you need to swing and all, guns you just need to pull the trigger.

[analogZero]

Originally Posted by SteyrAUG

As for the "silent kill" and "honor" bullshit arguments read the first post.

Over 11,000 deaths from guns in America annually? I'd like to see proof of that. I always hear this that and the other statistic for firearm related death.

not a man of honor, huh?

anyhow, here's something I found on death rates. the top ranking is for suicides, proving yet again how much more efficient guns really are.

http://thegreenman.net.au/mt/gun_deaths_in_usa.htm

here's something a little more recent published by the new york times.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/20...H_GRAPHIC.html

and here's the address mentioned in the article. you can go through and find death rates for all kinds of things too. 2 795 killed by blades in 2005 in the US. how about that.

http://cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/

[Russkie]

Originally Posted by listerlee

blade is better because we don't have to reload it..

Can you kill your target 2 miles away with a "blade"?

No... but a gun can (i.e. .50 Caliber riffle).