What's with losers and swords, swords suck!

What's your favorite?

Total Votes:

[ 0 ]

This poll closed on December 8, 2004.
No longer accepting new votes.

[Ultima Squall]

Valheru Lightbringer

Ultima Squall

Yellow-M

Swords are just way more satisfying to be good with. Guns? I know they're the better weapon but they are so for pussies, come on you know it.

Don't try and tell me that you could kick my a** with a gun either, it just makes you even more of a p***y.

I can't believe you could actually argue that an inferior weapon by about 500 years is superior. Also, what kind of a guy likes swords, I don't think there's a male in america over the age of twenty who prefers swords.

You'd be wrong. Very many of my over 20 male friends prefer swords.

they're queers aren't they?

[Ne Sciamus]

Yellow-M

Ultima Squall

Yellow-M

Swords are just way more satisfying to be good with. Guns? I know they're the better weapon but they are so for pussies, come on you know it.

Don't try and tell me that you could kick my a** with a gun either, it just makes you even more of a p***y.

I can't believe you could actually argue that an inferior weapon by about 500 years is superior. Also, what kind of a guy likes swords, I don't think there's a male in america over the age of twenty who prefers swords.

I'm afraid that may be because by the time americans get to 20 they are too obese to use one without losing their breath.

Seriously though, I couldn't care less which was more effective. I simply said that swords were more satisfying to use. There are far more exercises that you can do with them in training, plus you can spar with sword techniques. A lot more control in your own situation than with say paintballing.

This is a stupid argument because you don't like guns because they're better. I don't prefer swords because they're better. If we had those kind of interests we'd be debating between scudds and nukes.

*Looks down at my body. 5'10, 130 lbs*

********, I'm so fat.

[NikitaDarkstar]

Blood Ravenous

Ultima Squall

I hate it how people are always saying things like this:

"you can block bullets with a sword"
"swords are better than guns"
"guns are for losers with no skills"
"guns take no skills to use"
"guns have no tactics to them"


1. Swords can not block/deflect a bullet, a bullet travels at anywhere from 1000-5000 feet per second, which is much to fast to be blocked by a sword. Also, If you managed to bring your sword to where the bullet is coming from, the bullet would go straight through the sword and keep going at a steady strength. Some guns (i.e.- Shotguns) fire more than one projectile, a shutgun would blow you to pieces, literally.

2. In order to operate a gun you be must be very strong. The recoil on just a .30 caliber gun hurts you arm like hell, a 12 gauge shotgun almost breaks your shoulder when you fire it. You also must wear ear protection because the explosion of the gun powder in the cartdridge is deafening and would permanently damage your hearing.

3. The tactics of a war have become more important. The were no tactics in the days of the sword because, well, swords sucked. The wars we fight now are trench wars, extremely tactical.



No matter what you say, I will not change my mind. I will always have a comeback.

I noticed how you didn't refute "guns take no skill," and if you did you'd be wrong. As long as you can aim and reload, which anyone but maybe little kids or blind people could do, you can kill someone.

For 2), that's for the stronger guns. Things like pistols and such are very easy to use and you can kill someone.

For 3), no tactics?! Did you even do research? Obviously not! Formations were very important, and using the terrain was even more important. For trench warfare, how can you call shooting at each other while hiding be tactics?

Guns are for weaklings.

*adressing the bold stuff*

Actually have you first used both a weapon with a nasty kickback, like the German Mauser 96 (ancient I know, but woha that kickback), I've used that one and first time I used it I actually broke my collarbone (ok positioned it slightly wrong), but it's an easy to use weapon once you've accustomed to the kickback and have a steady firing position. But I found that easier to use and aim with than a glock pistol, that damn pistol i think i got 2 bullest out of 30 where I wanted it on 50 meter range, first time I used it, with the mauser 96 I got about 90% of the bullets where I wanted them in a 100m distance.

What I'm getting at isin't that the smalelr weapons are nessicarily the ones that are easier to use, and that it takes skill and practise to use both correctly without hurting yourself.

Shure swords are neat and I admit I love swords, they're beutifull weapons and I guess they could be a decent stealth weapons (but then thats what sniper rifles with sounddampeners are for), but guns own them every single time.

[Wildblade]

Ultima Squall

I hate it how people are always saying things like this:

"you can block bullets with a sword"
"swords are better than guns"
"guns are for losers with no skills"
"guns take no skills to use"
"guns have no tactics to them"


1. Swords can not block/deflect a bullet, a bullet travels at anywhere from 1000-5000 feet per second, which is much to fast to be blocked by a sword. Also, If you managed to bring your sword to where the bullet is coming from, the bullet would go straight through the sword and keep going at a steady strength. Some guns (i.e.- Shotguns) fire more than one projectile, a shutgun would blow you to pieces, literally.

2. In order to operate a gun you be must be very strong. The recoil on just a .30 caliber gun hurts you arm like hell, a 12 gauge shotgun almost breaks your shoulder when you fire it. You also must wear ear protection because the explosion of the gun powder in the cartdridge is deafening and would permanently damage your hearing.

3. The tactics of a war have become more important. The were no tactics in the days of the sword because, well, swords sucked. The wars we fight now are trench wars, extremely tactical.



No matter what you say, I will not change my mind. I will always have a comeback.

Try this...guns are for coward who can't be manly enough to look into a mans eyes as he dies. To kill with a sword you have to be close. You have to make the decision while watching his eyes (like all swordsmen are trained to do) when to kill him. You have to watch as the life leaves his eyes and you always have that in your head. Guns are for coward who want to stand at a distance and never once have to take responsibility for their actions. They simply squeeze the trigger and someone, some stranger, hundreds of yards away might die... I see no bravery or courage in that.

[Ne Sciamus]

Ultima Squall

Valheru Lightbringer

Ultima Squall

Yellow-M

Swords are just way more satisfying to be good with. Guns? I know they're the better weapon but they are so for pussies, come on you know it.

Don't try and tell me that you could kick my a** with a gun either, it just makes you even more of a p***y.

I can't believe you could actually argue that an inferior weapon by about 500 years is superior. Also, what kind of a guy likes swords, I don't think there's a male in america over the age of twenty who prefers swords.

You'd be wrong. Very many of my over 20 male friends prefer swords.

they're queers aren't they?

Nah, they're actually very straight, and very good in bed(So I've heard from their respective girlfriends-my ex also liked swords, and damn was he a tiger)

[Captain Pooshoes]

Zianete

...I'm trying to imagine a driveby shooting..but with swords instead of guns. xd

CALVARY CHARGE!

Sally forth!

[Secret Asian Man]

Swords hold a large portion of the hierachy of Honour. You can't really justify a gun for being anything but a long range p***y weapon. It doesn't take skill or spiritual awareness to pull a trigger. Swords are like our souls, they can be the only thing that can stand between your opponent and your soul. It's a physical manifestation of your soul, a swordweilder and the art of fighting with a blade are intricately connected in the sense that a person wields a blade well is more intune with their soul. Anyways, that's my opinion

[xXChibiMaikuXx]

Ultima Squall

Yellow-M

Swords are just way more satisfying to be good with. Guns? I know they're the better weapon but they are so for pussies, come on you know it.

Don't try and tell me that you could kick my a** with a gun either, it just makes you even more of a p***y.

I can't believe you could actually argue that an inferior weapon by about 500 years is superior. Also, what kind of a guy likes swords, I don't think there's a male in america over the age of twenty who prefers swords.

Do NOT call a sword an inferior weapon. How ignorant must you be to actually say that? How can you sit there and spit out feces about how shitty a sword is? Guns are nice. Swords are too! You know how much effort goes into traditional sword making? The story behind each blade? There's a sense of honor and power in those weapons and youre calling them worthless.

And do you know how many people out there who collect swords as a hobby? (There's gun collectors too, I'm not saying there aren't)

[Shay Straylight]

Ultima Squall

I hate it how people are always saying things like this:

"you can block bullets with a sword"

I agree, this is next to impossible.

Quote:

"swords are better than guns"

This is highly subjective and depends on the situation. A sword is better than a gun with no ammunition. A sword does not require as wide a reactionary gap as a gun does.

Quote:

"guns are for losers with no skills"

A firearm requires a great deal of skill to use it effectively, though arguably not as much as is required to use a sword effectively. Principles such as balance, distance, proper breathing, etc. apply to both.

Quote:

"guns take no skills to use"

See above.

Quote:

"guns have no tactics to them"

I agree with you that this is blantantly false. An experienced firearm user can rattle off a list of things to keep in mind when using a firearm. Examples include ammunition conservation, what types of targets you should select (example, shooting someone in the torso is easier than shooting them in the leg, arm or head, depending on the distance the target is from you).

Quote:

1. Swords can not block/deflect a bullet, a bullet travels at anywhere from 1000-5000 feet per second, which is much to fast to be blocked by a sword. Also, If you managed to bring your sword to where the bullet is coming from, the bullet would go straight through the sword and keep going at a steady strength. Some guns (i.e.- Shotguns) fire more than one projectile, a shutgun would blow you to pieces, literally.

I agree that buckshot can rip somebody apart, and that few people have the kind of reflexes required to parry/block a bullet. However, the bullet would not travel through the sword unless the sword was a piece of s**t. Even if it did, it wouldn't be going at a "steady strength". Did you fail high school physics or something?

Quote:

2. In order to operate a gun you be must be very strong. The recoil on just a .30 caliber gun hurts you arm like hell, a 12 gauge shotgun almost breaks your shoulder when you fire it. You also must wear ear protection because the explosion of the gun powder in the cartdridge is deafening and would permanently damage your hearing.

If you know how to hold the firearm properly, you don't need to be very strong.

Quote:

3. The tactics of a war have become more important. The were no tactics in the days of the sword because, well, swords sucked. The wars we fight now are trench wars, extremely tactical.

Yes, actually, there were tactics. I ******** dare you to prove to me that the Roman Legionnaires didn't use any kind of tactics. The tactics were simply different. Tactics are actually less important in war nowadays, since unless you have ground troops in enemy territory, you can simply blast your opponents to ashes by pushing a button from a thousand miles away. Also, swords were not the only weapons used in such wars.

Quote:

No matter what you say, I will not change my mind. I will always have a comeback.

So what the hell is the point of posting in ED if you're not flexible enough to participate in an adult conversation?

Quote:

well, you see, if we "dueled" all you would have to do is pull the trigger, I'd be dead before you heard anything.

Incorrect. Does the term "reactionary gap" ring a bell? If the sword-wielder was less than twenty-five feet away from the gunslinger, he/she would have a fairly decent chance of filleting their opponent.

[Yellow-M]

Valheru Lightbringer

*Looks down at my body. 5'10, 130 lbs*

********, I'm so fat.

Nice one, you can't take a joke and you try and talk to me with the imperial system. The rest of the world is metric y'know.

[Sentience]

Yellow-M

Valheru Lightbringer

*Looks down at my body. 5'10, 130 lbs*

********, I'm so fat.

Nice one, you can't take a joke and you try and talk to me with the imperial system. The rest of the world is metric y'know.

And America's not. So what?

[SatoruX]

I read through this post and here is my opinion. Guns = Not as fun as swords but easy to kill someone. Sword = Fun But if you were fighting a gunner you'd be down. I myself hate guns though. I practice with wooden swords alot and a gunner could come up behind and and bam im dead the end of my pathetic life (which would do me a favor but not the point). Guns require NO tactics at all a baby could shoot and kill and yes the baby may not have perfect accuracy but if it pulled the trigger and hit a good spot you'd be dead. A baby could not use a sword let alone lift it. But there is a chance the person with a sword can beat a gunner. The gunner could have very low accuracy and the person with the sword could be very fast. And i agree a bullet from a pellet gun cannot go through a good sword no way in hell. So to sum what i just said up I love sword hate guns. And im even surprised people post here because you say "No matter what you say i will not change my mind. I will have a comeback for everything." And people in Anime shows prefer swords over guns (Except in some cases like trigun) because sword fights last longer and are more intense.

And i want to make a comment about this " I can't believe you could actually argue that an inferior weapon by about 500 years is superior. Also, what kind of a guy likes swords, I don't think there's a male in america over the age of twenty who prefers swords. " That is such a lie. Many people in my city love swords. My friend for instance has a collection of them and he is 25. AND YES I AM IN AMERICA and i am AMERICAN and my friend is AMERICAN.

[Ne Sciamus]

Yellow-M

Valheru Lightbringer

*Looks down at my body. 5'10, 130 lbs*

********, I'm so fat.

Nice one, you can't take a joke and you try and talk to me with the imperial system. The rest of the world is metric y'know.

Err..where the ******** are my conversion factors. Hold on a sec...


1.7 meters..and..err..

59.1 Kilograms.

That better, mr metric, or shall I go into SI units?

[Shay Straylight]

I'm Canadian, but I used Imperial. Bad Canuck!

Note: 25 ft. = 7.62 meters

[Ne Sciamus]

Yellow-M

Valheru Lightbringer

*Looks down at my body. 5'10, 130 lbs*

********, I'm so fat.

Nice one, you can't take a joke and you try and talk to me with the imperial system. The rest of the world is metric y'know.

By the way, I was joking in return. It's called Sarcasm. Try understanding it.