Godwins Attorney
Offline
READ THE WHOLE OP, OR DON'T POST AT ALL.
This is pretty straight forward. What weapon do you think would be the most useful for disposing of zombies? One for long range, such as a firearm or a bow, and one for short range, such as a crowbar or a bladed weapon of some kind. However, we first have to establish some baseline rules and guidelines to keep in mind.
1. The weapons have to be somewhat readily available. No gold-plated miniguns or tanks. Be real. (This also applies for ammo) You have 1 month to gather supplies, including your weapon.
2. The most effective way of disposing a zombie is to damage the brain or spinal cord. These are not the god-mode zombies that infect you if you get a drop of blood splattered on you, or have a super-organ in the frontal lobe of the brain that makes tasers useless or preforms the functions of other vital organs. This means that while the zombies cannot feel pain, (as is the standard condition of zombies) they can still be killed by wounds to vital organs. These zombies also are not afraid of anything, and have very little survival instinct above the instinct to eat and drink- mostly just the instinct to bite (among one of the two ways they infect) living people. (You can pass yourself off as a zombie if you have the right disguise. They do not have super-sight or the nose of a bloodhound, but they will be able to tell if you're human the same way you'd be able to tell if they're a zombie- smell, appearance, taste, (by the time they taste you, you're already screwed, though) and your voice. (moaning like a zombie can fool them, though) They can't tell by your temperature, though, as zombies can't feel anything. The exact biology behind these zombies shall remain ambiguous. Keep in mind that saliva borne illnesses are also blood borne, so if you happen to get too much in your eyes, nose, mouth, open wound, etc., you can get infected.
3. Although they can be killed by wounds to vital organs, because they cannot feel pain, they will still be able to come after you for a short while depending on where you hit them. The zombies cannot run exceptionally fast, but do not stumble along like a toddler. Imagine a sort of cross between a jog and a walk. (If any of you have played Resident Evil 4, these zombies move at the pace of a "running" Ganado.)
4. If you fail to support your argument and do so in an arrogant way, you will be blocked. Also, for Christ's sake, use proper grammar and spelling. If you can't bother to write a complete sentence, then I'm not going to bother to have you in my thread.
5. NO MILITARY (ONLY), SCI-FI, OR FANTASY WEAPONS. This includes the AA-12, the rocket propelled chainsaw, the lightsaber, the landshark gun, and all other weapons exclusive to military personnel and science fiction. Seriously, stop mentioning them.
6. If you say or imply that dismembering humans is relatively easy with [insert weapon here], you will be banned from the thread. Also, anyone referencing the Zombie Survival Guide or World War Z in a factual matter will also be banned. This is because they are not in any way credible sources, and were written entirely for entertainment. They relate very little to the topic at hand- weapons.
7. If you think we've had a misunderstanding or that I ignored you unfairly, contact Godwins Attorney.
8. Apparently, this must be said: The zombies must be alive. Allow Mr. T to explain:
Personally, the firearms I would take would be the AR-15 and the M1911.
AR-15: It's light, dependable, and requires little maintenance. All I'd have to do is make sure I oil it and clean it every now and then, like most firearms. It's got what I would call a high-capacity magazine, which can hold 30 rounds, though they do make double drum magazines that hole 100. (Which I would not carry.) The AR-15 is also very accurate, up to 500 yards even with the cheaper models. The cartridge is about intermediate, enough to easily kill a zombie, but not enough to tire one's shoulder from the kick, or their legs from the weight. And finally, it's semi-automatic, which is indispensable in a versatile carbine. Cost: 600-5,000+ dollars. Cost for ammunition: .25-2+ dollars each.
M1911: It is, in my opinion, the perfect combat handgun. It's reliable, requires very little maintaining, and fires a powerful enough cartridge to cause hydrostatic shock, but has a light enough kick to not embed the front sight in one's face. A downside to it, however, is the fact that it only has an 8 round magazine capacity. But I would only ever use it to stay alive long enough to reach the rifle I shouldn't have put down in the first place. Cost: 400-2,000+ dollars. Cost for ammunition: .38-.60+ dollars each.
The Chinese Military Shovel:
Simply put, this is perfect for wilderness survival. Some people like Ka-Bars. Those people are foolish Western simpletons who cannot hold a candle to our Chinese overlords. And while the Great Ones may suck at gunsmithing, they sure made one hell of a shovel. Behold:
Cost: 100$
Alternate armament, for the poor/economical:
The Mosin-Nagant M44 and TT-33.
The Mosin-Nagant M44: It is, in my opinion, the perfect poor man's rifle. They are cheap as dirt, the ammunition is cheap as dirt, breaking one is extremely difficult, they're accurate enough up to 300-400 yards, and there really isn't anything bad about them when you consider how little you pay. They can be used as clubs, as spears, as oars, as hammers, and don't need much maintenance unless you shoot corrosive ammunition. (If you shoot corrosive ammunition, you have to pour hot water down the barrel after firing.) The fact that they aren't semi-automatic is made up for by the fact that you can use them as spears or clubs. Cost: 79 dollars. Cost for ammunition: 18-22 cents per round.
I'll be updating this later when I have the time, 'cause I neglected to outline why the TT-33 would be another great economical choice.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Reason for revision: Previously, I had my weapons listed as the Benelli M4 Super 90 Semi-Automatic Shotgun, Glock 17, and Kukri. However, I have come to change all of those in favor of alternatives that would suit me better.
Why AR-15 > Shotgun: Now, I won't go as far as saying the AR-15 is BETTER than the shotgun, but it is better FOR ME. This is because I cannot handle the recoil of the shotgun time and time and time again. It's just too much, and that does not help. Also, the AR-15's ammo (.223 or 5.56) is far lighter and smaller than 12-gauge shotgun shells, making it easier to transport.
Why AR-15 > Mosin-Nagant: Once again, better for me, not for everyone. I prefer the AR-15 over the Mosin because it is semi-automatic, has much less recoil, a larger, detachable magazine, and ammunition that is both smaller and lighter.
Why M1911 > Glock 17: (This may get me flamed) Now, I'm not saying the Glock 17 is a bad gun- far from it. If it was a truly bad weapon, I wouldn't have chosen it in the first place. However, I have come to prefer the M1911 in this situation. It can cause hydrostatic shock, meaning a chest shot would be lethal in around, say, 30 seconds or so. Because of this, it makes up for the fact that it has less ammo capacity than the Glock. (And there would be little reason for me to need 17 rounds, seeing as side-arms are mostly used to buy time for you to get to the long-arm you shouldn't have put down in the first place.)
_______________________________________________________________________________
READ THIS BEFORE YOU WHINE ABOUT THIS THREAD'S LEGITIMACY-This thread is also NOT ABOUT ZOMBIES- it is about the best weapon to dispose of the brand of zombie mentioned previously.
This is pretty straight forward. What weapon do you think would be the most useful for disposing of zombies? One for long range, such as a firearm or a bow, and one for short range, such as a crowbar or a bladed weapon of some kind. However, we first have to establish some baseline rules and guidelines to keep in mind.
1. The weapons have to be somewhat readily available. No gold-plated miniguns or tanks. Be real. (This also applies for ammo) You have 1 month to gather supplies, including your weapon.
2. The most effective way of disposing a zombie is to damage the brain or spinal cord. These are not the god-mode zombies that infect you if you get a drop of blood splattered on you, or have a super-organ in the frontal lobe of the brain that makes tasers useless or preforms the functions of other vital organs. This means that while the zombies cannot feel pain, (as is the standard condition of zombies) they can still be killed by wounds to vital organs. These zombies also are not afraid of anything, and have very little survival instinct above the instinct to eat and drink- mostly just the instinct to bite (among one of the two ways they infect) living people. (You can pass yourself off as a zombie if you have the right disguise. They do not have super-sight or the nose of a bloodhound, but they will be able to tell if you're human the same way you'd be able to tell if they're a zombie- smell, appearance, taste, (by the time they taste you, you're already screwed, though) and your voice. (moaning like a zombie can fool them, though) They can't tell by your temperature, though, as zombies can't feel anything. The exact biology behind these zombies shall remain ambiguous. Keep in mind that saliva borne illnesses are also blood borne, so if you happen to get too much in your eyes, nose, mouth, open wound, etc., you can get infected.
3. Although they can be killed by wounds to vital organs, because they cannot feel pain, they will still be able to come after you for a short while depending on where you hit them. The zombies cannot run exceptionally fast, but do not stumble along like a toddler. Imagine a sort of cross between a jog and a walk. (If any of you have played Resident Evil 4, these zombies move at the pace of a "running" Ganado.)
4. If you fail to support your argument and do so in an arrogant way, you will be blocked. Also, for Christ's sake, use proper grammar and spelling. If you can't bother to write a complete sentence, then I'm not going to bother to have you in my thread.
5. NO MILITARY (ONLY), SCI-FI, OR FANTASY WEAPONS. This includes the AA-12, the rocket propelled chainsaw, the lightsaber, the landshark gun, and all other weapons exclusive to military personnel and science fiction. Seriously, stop mentioning them.
6. If you say or imply that dismembering humans is relatively easy with [insert weapon here], you will be banned from the thread. Also, anyone referencing the Zombie Survival Guide or World War Z in a factual matter will also be banned. This is because they are not in any way credible sources, and were written entirely for entertainment. They relate very little to the topic at hand- weapons.
7. If you think we've had a misunderstanding or that I ignored you unfairly, contact Godwins Attorney.
8. Apparently, this must be said: The zombies must be alive. Allow Mr. T to explain:
Personally, the firearms I would take would be the AR-15 and the M1911.
AR-15: It's light, dependable, and requires little maintenance. All I'd have to do is make sure I oil it and clean it every now and then, like most firearms. It's got what I would call a high-capacity magazine, which can hold 30 rounds, though they do make double drum magazines that hole 100. (Which I would not carry.) The AR-15 is also very accurate, up to 500 yards even with the cheaper models. The cartridge is about intermediate, enough to easily kill a zombie, but not enough to tire one's shoulder from the kick, or their legs from the weight. And finally, it's semi-automatic, which is indispensable in a versatile carbine. Cost: 600-5,000+ dollars. Cost for ammunition: .25-2+ dollars each.
M1911: It is, in my opinion, the perfect combat handgun. It's reliable, requires very little maintaining, and fires a powerful enough cartridge to cause hydrostatic shock, but has a light enough kick to not embed the front sight in one's face. A downside to it, however, is the fact that it only has an 8 round magazine capacity. But I would only ever use it to stay alive long enough to reach the rifle I shouldn't have put down in the first place. Cost: 400-2,000+ dollars. Cost for ammunition: .38-.60+ dollars each.
The Chinese Military Shovel:
Simply put, this is perfect for wilderness survival. Some people like Ka-Bars. Those people are foolish Western simpletons who cannot hold a candle to our Chinese overlords. And while the Great Ones may suck at gunsmithing, they sure made one hell of a shovel. Behold:
Cost: 100$
Alternate armament, for the poor/economical:
The Mosin-Nagant M44 and TT-33.
The Mosin-Nagant M44: It is, in my opinion, the perfect poor man's rifle. They are cheap as dirt, the ammunition is cheap as dirt, breaking one is extremely difficult, they're accurate enough up to 300-400 yards, and there really isn't anything bad about them when you consider how little you pay. They can be used as clubs, as spears, as oars, as hammers, and don't need much maintenance unless you shoot corrosive ammunition. (If you shoot corrosive ammunition, you have to pour hot water down the barrel after firing.) The fact that they aren't semi-automatic is made up for by the fact that you can use them as spears or clubs. Cost: 79 dollars. Cost for ammunition: 18-22 cents per round.
I'll be updating this later when I have the time, 'cause I neglected to outline why the TT-33 would be another great economical choice.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Reason for revision: Previously, I had my weapons listed as the Benelli M4 Super 90 Semi-Automatic Shotgun, Glock 17, and Kukri. However, I have come to change all of those in favor of alternatives that would suit me better.
Why AR-15 > Shotgun: Now, I won't go as far as saying the AR-15 is BETTER than the shotgun, but it is better FOR ME. This is because I cannot handle the recoil of the shotgun time and time and time again. It's just too much, and that does not help. Also, the AR-15's ammo (.223 or 5.56) is far lighter and smaller than 12-gauge shotgun shells, making it easier to transport.
Why AR-15 > Mosin-Nagant: Once again, better for me, not for everyone. I prefer the AR-15 over the Mosin because it is semi-automatic, has much less recoil, a larger, detachable magazine, and ammunition that is both smaller and lighter.
Why M1911 > Glock 17: (This may get me flamed) Now, I'm not saying the Glock 17 is a bad gun- far from it. If it was a truly bad weapon, I wouldn't have chosen it in the first place. However, I have come to prefer the M1911 in this situation. It can cause hydrostatic shock, meaning a chest shot would be lethal in around, say, 30 seconds or so. Because of this, it makes up for the fact that it has less ammo capacity than the Glock. (And there would be little reason for me to need 17 rounds, seeing as side-arms are mostly used to buy time for you to get to the long-arm you shouldn't have put down in the first place.)
_______________________________________________________________________________
READ THIS BEFORE YOU WHINE ABOUT THIS THREAD'S LEGITIMACY-
The Extended Discussion's Rules & Guidelines
What makes a thread appropriate for ED is not subject matter alone, but the level of discussion and debate the thread topic generates. How 'serious' a subject is (war, abortion, politics) does not affect a thread's status in ED.
As for close range, my choice would be either a katar...
