The topic is me. This never happens......

I have no idea what that is, XD. Anyway, I have officially stopped caring. Zorth can defend his own damn opinions.

Joural wrote:

No, you could not pick up a sword and kill lots of people. why? because that strategy you discussed for taking out a shooter is even EASIER against someone using a sword. they're tired, they're moving slower, and more importantly it takes far longer to turn and swing a sword than to turn and shoot a gun. never mind RUN AWAY. Plus, all it takes is one bad swing and someone who was about to be your victim will knock you on your ass. Yoiu will never convince me that a sword is as easy to use as a gun, or that people with no training could ever hope to kill just about anyone with a medieval weapon. You know what makes guns unique? if I'm standing 10 feet from you, and we both have a gun, you could have trained for years but if I pull that trigger first, you're dead. this can be true with bows, yes, but someone with no training has almost no hope of hitting a moving target at 10 feet. And unless you plan to grab a bow and try to prove me wrong, YOU WILL NEVER CHANGE MY MIND. We should let this topic die, because it isn't going ANYWHERE, except for maybe a flame war. And flame wars are not good debates, they are useless shouting matches that accomplish nothing.

I'll concede to that. I'd like to add that I probably should've worded it better: something like a knife, as opposed to a sword would be easier to use without training.

And if you don't have enough ammunition, then your gun's lethality drops severely. Unless you have a bayonet or something similar, and I am unfamiliar of any school shootings with a bayonet affixed weapon.

I am unfamiliar with any school shootings where they ran out of ammo.

No weapon is perfect, my friends. A weapon is only as strong as it's weakest part, which happens to be the person that hold's it. A gun is no exception, few people I know hit the target the first time they fired at a moving target 10 or so feet away.

School shootings hardly count as they kill them selves with their last shot. :V

But seriously people... we need to start talking about stuff other than destruction of human life... It is reinforcing several thoughts I have suppressed over the years.

Joural, you dont need to worry about ditching me, you already summed up my point.

I do not object to any weapon in an of themselves. We have nukes these days that have 20 times the destructive force of the ones that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you dont see me out there with at nuclear proliferation protest rallies. Joural summed up my point very well. Martial arts, swords, bows. These are things that take time to master, and in that time you learn not just HOW to kill, you learn WHY to kill. WHEN to kill. Indeed, IF to kill.

The military teaches you the soldiers code, a code of honor that does not allow you to kill wantonly or without justifiable cause. My army, the Canadian army, was the most feared army in both world wars because we took no prisoners. Why? Not because we were soulless monsters who wanted to destroy all human life in our way. We are among the most highly trained and discipliined armies on the planet. We shot them because if we didn't, we would have had to let them starve to death. It was mercy to not make them suffer a slow, painful and inevitable death. Tragic? yes. Justified? Yes.

No, I have never killed. I have never been in war. I foresee both in my future. But niether of those things are qualifiers in any way. If I can feel at all, I know what these things can do.

Alaska, if you or patches would be kind enough to now lock this thread, that would be very much appreciated. At this point all this topic can do is decend into a bloody flaming crap-shoot.

At request of OP.