• 61 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Coolii (286 posts) - - Show Bio

Whats your take on it?


LOL
#2 Posted by The_Warlord (1777 posts) - - Show Bio

They are certainly more fun :P

#3 Posted by D3athstroke (3916 posts) - - Show Bio
@Coolii said:
Whats your take on it?

LOL
You Played DMC 3. Did not you ?
#4 Posted by MrUnknown (1700 posts) - - Show Bio

Swords require skill. Guns - whoever pulls the trigger first.

#5 Posted by Coolii (286 posts) - - Show Bio
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
Whats your take on it?

LOL
You Played DMC 3. Did not you ?
Whats DMC?
#6 Posted by D3athstroke (3916 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrUnknown said:
Swords require skill. Guns - whoever pulls the trigger first.
Guns Require Skills too
  
#7 Posted by JediXMan (30608 posts) - - Show Bio

My honor scale:

Hand-to-hand > Swords > Knives > Guns > Explosives > Nukes > Bio-weapons

Weapons throughout the ages....

Moderator
#8 Posted by D3athstroke (3916 posts) - - Show Bio
@Coolii said:
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
Whats your take on it?

LOL
You Played DMC 3. Did not you ?
Whats DMC?
Devil May Cry 3
There is one character Named Vergil Who Thinks That Way
#9 Posted by Coolii (286 posts) - - Show Bio
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
Whats your take on it?

LOL
You Played DMC 3. Did not you ?
Whats DMC?
Devil May Cry 3There is one character Named Vergil Who Thinks That Way
Oh, OK but I don't think swords are more honorable in any way just think it's laughable that some anime freaks think that way LOL.
#10 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio

Honor has nothing to do with weapons 

#11 Posted by Susanoo (5909 posts) - - Show Bio
@joshmightbe said:


                    Honor has nothing to do with weapons 

                   

               

Back then, it has to do with the person. No matter if having weapons or not. (Fight with Honor) ect. But it was back then.
#12 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio
@Susanoo: Weapons and life may have changed but honor has not
#13 Posted by D3athstroke (3916 posts) - - Show Bio
@Coolii said:
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
@D3athstroke said:
@Coolii said:
Whats your take on it?

LOL
You Played DMC 3. Did not you ?
Whats DMC?
Devil May Cry 3There is one character Named Vergil Who Thinks That Way
Oh, OK but I don't think swords are more honorable in any way just think it's laughable that some anime freaks think that way LOL.

Lol Yeah in Japanese Cartoons one guy with sword kills Hundreds of Armed Soldiers and then says something "cool" and  kids watching this are often saying things like that 
I mean come on
#14 Posted by Static Shock (47329 posts) - - Show Bio

They are both used and made for killing. I don't think one is more honorable than the other.

#15 Posted by cascadeking09 (6758 posts) - - Show Bio
@Static Shock: Agreed. It's like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
#16 Posted by Susanoo (5909 posts) - - Show Bio
@joshmightbe said:


                    @Susanoo: Weapons and life may have changed but honor has not

                   

               

Honor is based on perspective. For instance: Live by the sword, die by the sword, Samurai Honor, Glory and Honor, death ect. Yes it's different.
#17 Posted by Static Shock (47329 posts) - - Show Bio
@cascadeking09: Exactly.
#18 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio
@Susanoo: Honor is a keen sense of ethical conduct, that is the actual definition so how honor is obtained may have changed but it is still the same concept as its always been
#19 Posted by velle37 (6058 posts) - - Show Bio
@cascadeking09 said:

@Static Shock: Agreed. It's like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."


   
#20 Posted by cascadeking09 (6758 posts) - - Show Bio
@velle37: LMFAO
#21 Posted by U R Sofa King We Todd Did (1124 posts) - - Show Bio
@JediXMan said:
My honor scale:Hand-to-hand > Swords > Knives > Guns > Explosives > Nukes > Bio-weapons > Kick-to-the-Balls Weapons throughout the ages....
#22 Posted by Susanoo (5909 posts) - - Show Bio
@joshmightbe said:


                    @Susanoo: Honor is a keen sense of ethical conduct, that is the actual definition so how honor is obtained may have changed but it is still the same concept as its always been

                   

               

True.
#23 Edited by Picard (999 posts) - - Show Bio
@CooliiSwords are more honorable than guns??? 

Yes, their  require more skills and courage. You must face your oponent in a single combat, but with gun... you can kill many people with sniper gun, before they even realize what hit them. And even with normal hand gun... you can shoot  someone from distance. don't giving him opportunity to defend himself. You can fight with swordsman, you can't however fight with speeding bulletts. So yes swords, are less effective but more honorable. 
#24 Posted by Deadpool666 (81 posts) - - Show Bio

Swords more honorable than Guns? Ha! No. Sword wielders talk too much.
Scenario:
Swordsman: I will defeat you with my superior skills!
Gunman: ...
Swordsman: Your use of guns is dishon- BANG! falls down dead
Gunman: *twirls gun and puts it its holster* Another one bites the dust.

@velle37: I lol'd so frickin' hard. Thank you.

#25 Posted by Picard (999 posts) - - Show Bio
@Deadpool666
Swords more honorable than Guns

Yess their are more honorable  but far less effective
#26 Posted by Deadpool666 (81 posts) - - Show Bio
@Picard: And less fun. Its harder to paint the walls with someones brains with a sword.
#27 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio
@Deadpool666: unless you're in a 70s kung fu movie
#28 Posted by Freefa11 (2380 posts) - - Show Bio
@joshmightbe said:
Honor has nothing to do with weapons 

Exactly. Do people think swords were never used dishonorably? Come on, I'm sure there were tons of mercs and brigands in all ages who would use whatever weapons they could get to kill women, children, the elderly, or the weak in sneak attacks and raids with 5-to-1 or 10-to-1 odds in their favor. What guns did was just make it easier for them. Guns are so easy to use and so effective that any fat cowardly slob has a realistic chance at taking down Bruce Lee.

One of the ideas behind guns and making them so simple is the idea that you can build an army of common morons and in just a few days of training, they'll be able to use these very deadly weapons halfway well. Unfortunately, a (ridiculously obvious) side-effect of this is that we have a bunch of common morons with guns running around who can use them halfway well.

So it's not really that guns are inherently less honorable, so much as dis-honorable people will naturally be far more attracted to guns. That doesn't mean someone with a sword is automatically a more honorable person though.
#29 Posted by EdwardWindsor (14428 posts) - - Show Bio

I refer you to the case of indian jones , sword maybe more honourable but what would you rather have in a  fight ?.

  

#30 Posted by HumanNumber (1466 posts) - - Show Bio

There is no honor in violence.

#31 Edited by EdwardWindsor (14428 posts) - - Show Bio
@HumanNumber:  depends on why you have to fight surely. If it to protect soemthing their most certainly is
#32 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio
@Freefa11: Swords have just become romanticized in modern culture, even the samurai who practically worshiped their swords knew that honor was something in the man, if he was honorable then his blade was @HumanNumber
The whole anti-violence idea is a nice thought but actually believing that violence serves no necessary function shows a profound lack of knowledge of how the world works. 
#33 Edited by Picard (999 posts) - - Show Bio
@Freefa11:
 Exactly. Do people think swords were never used dishonorably?

Sure, but this not the issue here. You can use all  kinds of weapon in dishonorable way - like sneaking up behind and stabbing someone in the back- but, if you going against guy with a sword, you can at least defend yourself- thier are, defence techniques in fencing like blocking and pairing. When you go against guy with a gun, when he point the gun and pull the trigger, you are pretty much dead, ther is no defence against that. So, in case of sword fight you are giving your oponent a chance to defend himself, and this is far more honorable, that just pulling the trigger and killing guy where he stands. 
#34 Posted by Green Skin (2932 posts) - - Show Bio

Swords are more honorable than guns?  I'd say yes.  With a sword you have to get in there, face to face.  It's takes courage to look a man in the eye when you try and take his life.  Any little punkass can pull a trigger.

#35 Posted by RisingBean (3981 posts) - - Show Bio


Of course when one swordsman is facing ten, the whole honor system is tossed out the window.   as stated before my post, it isn't the weapon it is the man holding it that matters.

 

Sure anybody with a firearm can pull a trigger, but there is a system to ranged combat and mastery takes as much dedication (and often bravery.) as fighting with melee. Try going to a bar and telling an infantry soldier he isn't honorable because he uses a rifle.

 

 I dare you.

#36 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio

Equating honor with what weapon is used shows a lack of understanding of what honor is


#37 Posted by Picard (999 posts) - - Show Bio
@RisingBean:
 Of course when one swordsman is facing ten, the whole honor system is tossed out the window.   as stated before my post, it isn't the weapon it is the man holding it that matters. 

We talking about weapons not about strength in numbers. And who wields a gun or a sword dosen't really metter. You can  defend yourself against the sword, against bullet... you dead, theirs no defense.

 Try going to a bar and telling an infantry soldier he isn't honorable because he uses a rifle.

And then he would fight me with his fist, with is far more honourable than shootnig someone. ;)
#38 Posted by HumanNumber (1466 posts) - - Show Bio
@lazystudent: The honor may come from protecting somebody but not from hurting the other. Having to resort to violence is something that must be done at times but shouldn't be enjoyed.

@joshmightbe
: I didn't say violence wasn't necessary, just not honorable.
#39 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (33396 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrUnknown said:
Swords require skill. Guns - whoever pulls the trigger first.
this is from some one who has never fired a rifle before
#40 Posted by MrUnknown (1700 posts) - - Show Bio
@spiderbat87: I've done neither. And, I'd like to inform you that most people haven't either.
#41 Posted by RisingBean (3981 posts) - - Show Bio


Touche' Picard. 

 

But I still stand by my point. Steel is steel. There are a lot more factors on a man's honor then what form that steel is fashioned into. Shooting an unarmed man or shooting one from behind? Not exactly honorable. Of course other circumstances may be at play. Numbers with and against you, and so on. I don't see an infantryman having more honor going around stabbing his foes then he would shooting them.

 

An unarmed man who lost his job today can beat his girlfriend. Is that honorable? No.

 

A man with a sword can attack his unarmed neighbor and gut him. Is that honorable? I personally don't see how.

 

A guy with a Carry and Conceal permit can see 5-6 thugs attempting to rob or rape a woman( or even a man). He can try to chase them off with the weapon and shoot those who attack him. Honorable? I would say yes.

 

Does it have anything to do with the medium used? (fist, sword or pistol)  Nope. It has everything to do with the mindset and motivation of the people involved.

 

 

#42 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (33396 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrUnknown said:
@spiderbat87: I've done neither. And, I'd like to inform you that most people haven't either.
Well I have and firing a weapon correctly using the marksmanship principles requires alot of skill
#43 Edited by Picard (999 posts) - - Show Bio
@RisingBean:
I will reply on you post later. In the meantime:
@spiderbat87
 Well I have and firing a weapon correctly using the marksmanship principles requires alot of skill

Thik is you don't have to be good marksmen to kill things with a weapon, fire AK 47 in general direction of the target, and I guarantee you that you gonna kill somethin. Even kids with machine guns are dangerous:
#44 Posted by mark5 (1213 posts) - - Show Bio
@Static Shock said:
They are both used and made for killing. I don't think one is more honorable than the other.
#45 Posted by GoldenStar66 (648 posts) - - Show Bio

This is not a battle.

#46 Posted by RisingBean (3981 posts) - - Show Bio

@Picard and Spiderbat as per principles of marksmanship and skill. As a former Infantryman who spent the 2007 surge in Baghdad, I can say that hitting a moving target with an M-4 in a real combat situation from any great distance away isn't the easiest thing to do. Those kids firing off the AK probably are spraying and praying as opposed to firing with any sense of precision. I'd bet that more then 20 to 30 feet away they would use a half magazine or more and be lucky to kill a single foe.
#47 Posted by biggkeem89 (1421 posts) - - Show Bio

Personally, I think a sword fight is more honorable than a gun fight. You actually need skill to wield a sword, and honestly, if I was close enough, I could disarm a person with a sword before they could fire a gun(my fencing training is paying off). Swords for the win

#48 Posted by spystreak (2063 posts) - - Show Bio

sword fights are definately more honorable but Guns are more effective and to anyone who thinks it doesn't take skill to shoot a gun your wrong you need to know how to handle the recoil, aimingdown your sights,how many rounds there are in a magazine and you need to know your distances sure you can just pick up a gun and fire it at a stationary target at a close range but good luck just picking up a gun and shootiing from a moving vehicle or at a moving target it's alot more difficult than you think
#49 Posted by MrUnknown (1700 posts) - - Show Bio
@spiderbat87: It takes skill; I didn't say it doesn't take any to fire a rifle. But it takes considerably more skill using a sword properly.
#50 Posted by Obtrusive (1646 posts) - - Show Bio

I talked to this girl once about romantic weapons and deaths.  I didn't get it, I probably won't get this either.