How efficient would "traditional" assassins be today?
- Thread starter effilctar
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, poisons, fiberwire and blades are a lot more stealthy than a gun, but a gun has range to balance out the noise factor.
But then, guns are traceable, where as I'm sure you could probably just get a poison from an inconspicuous holiday to a place with tonnes of snakes in it.
Over all, if I were an assassin, using a deadly poison on my target would be preferable to the evidence trail that results from firing a gun.
But then, guns are traceable, where as I'm sure you could probably just get a poison from an inconspicuous holiday to a place with tonnes of snakes in it.
Over all, if I were an assassin, using a deadly poison on my target would be preferable to the evidence trail that results from firing a gun.
Yes, and no. The missions Hassan Ibn Al Sabbah sent his Hassassins on weren't intended as suicide missions, and if they could escape they did. If they couldn't escape, they made as much commotion as possible.Mozared said:
Wasn't he an English man who went around with a cyanide canister hidden inside a newspaper and when he spotted his target, he'd spray it at them and it'd be an unidentifiable death?Xvito said:
Something about him marrying a barber from somewhere like Yorkshire, as well...
Ah, the things the TV teaches me.
Using knives just might work in a city like those in Grand Theft Auto, where crime rules all.
The only differences is that A) You wouldn't need to hide your knives B) you need to learn how to climb skyscrapers instead of small temples and C) You would need lots of bullet-proofing gear.
Or you can just ride around on a motorcycle slicing everyone open with a katana.
The only differences is that A) You wouldn't need to hide your knives B) you need to learn how to climb skyscrapers instead of small temples and C) You would need lots of bullet-proofing gear.
Or you can just ride around on a motorcycle slicing everyone open with a katana.
Someone with the skill, training, and intelligence of Kylar Stern, even in the first book where he's largely limited to the abilities of a normal human, could pull it off quite well, the exact same way he does. Days if not weeks of preparation and observation, and using whatever best suits the job and the situation. This likely would involve adapting some more modern techniques into one's repertoire, but at the same time a skilled enough assassin (and we are talking wetboy level here) could pull of an assassination of a well known Deader (like I said, wetboy level. Assassins have targets, because assassins sometimes miss)using pre-gunpowder weaponry and equipment.
A traditional assassin wouldn't work in modern society, atleast not on high security target.
Modern assassins would just have to adapt and use technology and modern weapons when the situation calls for it.
Modern assassins would just have to adapt and use technology and modern weapons when the situation calls for it.
My bomb tech would beg to differ. He insists the most feasible way is to vapourise the target, everyone around the target, the building the target is in and anyone standing nearby. Indiscriminate, yes, but entirely feasible.superbleeder12 said:
if you're defining an assassin as "Someone who kills a specific target with a knife and gets away with it" then probably not.
But people are assassinated all the time, and if Assassins Creed took place in the modern day it would use guns. Just last week some guy was gunned down outside a crowded grocery store... somewhere.. don't remember exactly, but it was on the news, and they actually showed the grainy video of the guy getting shot in the face and the assassin just calmly walking way.
shit still happens, just the weapons have changed, as they always will.
But people are assassinated all the time, and if Assassins Creed took place in the modern day it would use guns. Just last week some guy was gunned down outside a crowded grocery store... somewhere.. don't remember exactly, but it was on the news, and they actually showed the grainy video of the guy getting shot in the face and the assassin just calmly walking way.
shit still happens, just the weapons have changed, as they always will.
You have a point, but aren't assassin's supposed to use subtlety and all that nonsense?Rolling Thunder said:
Maybe you are unsure about what assassins did and how they did it. Cameras mean nothing if people think you are supposed to be there. For example, to kill the president an assassin would probably infiltrate the Secret Service if he didn't want to get caught(I am assuming he won't use guns and that the assassin is male). It could take a while but patience is a trait you need to have. The point is they would blend in to their environment more and use more subtly when killing.effilctar said:
Traditionally an assassin would use anything they could get they're hands on that could be used as a weapon, didn't have to mean daggers or poisons or throwing weapons. Could be anything!
Imagine getting a hit that required you to kill someone with a broom; it'd make you very creative wouldn't it? And that's what assassins wanted! Creativity may be seen as more of a serial murder type art but doesn't it require it when you want to stage an assassination as an accident?
Yes, a bullet to the head may be effective, but com'on. You cant make it look like an unfortunate event. I don't believe assassins have to be hindered by what the social media thinks they should use.
Personally, I'd use concealed blades and silenced weapons. If I know I'm able to get close, and not be noticed that means a point for the blades. Guns are for range on purpose (obviously). All in all, I'd be a hybrid.
Imagine getting a hit that required you to kill someone with a broom; it'd make you very creative wouldn't it? And that's what assassins wanted! Creativity may be seen as more of a serial murder type art but doesn't it require it when you want to stage an assassination as an accident?
Yes, a bullet to the head may be effective, but com'on. You cant make it look like an unfortunate event. I don't believe assassins have to be hindered by what the social media thinks they should use.
Personally, I'd use concealed blades and silenced weapons. If I know I'm able to get close, and not be noticed that means a point for the blades. Guns are for range on purpose (obviously). All in all, I'd be a hybrid.
It's easier more than ever these days. People think we're so advanced because we invented TV and the video camera, etc. but since 9/11, the law just kinda shoved it's head up it's ass and could never pull it back out. They're too focused on asinine things, and they always have been. Do you know how many unsolved murders and missing persons there are in this world, in America, in Europe?
Besides, if a corporation can manipulate constitutional law with mere money, lawyers and good ol' fashioned brute force intimidation, what do you think they can do when they want something more? Do you know how easy it is to fake a suicide or car accident?
Tsk tsk, open your eyes, welcome to the shadow world.
People always assume an assassination is a crude, violent act. Most of the time, it's an entirely separate species of beast. Most people are convinced that assassinations only happen with violence, but it's almost never the case anymore. Besides, it's much more easier to intensely discredit someone now, and absolutely humiliate them in the most absurd ways. However, if they need to be "dead", as in.. just dead for whatever reason, most 'intelligent' and calculating forces these days are already 10 steps ahead and see any sort of threat before it's ever made, so the "car accident" occurs 5 steps before there is ever suspicion.
There have been commercial airlines brought down for one single target, killing everyone else on board as well. Not too hard to trigger a 'failure' on a piece of equipment designed to rocket into the sky and fly 30,000ft in the air. When a whole jet comes crashing down, it's highly unlikely the first suspicion will be "single target assassination", but it's happened. Just saying.
Besides, if a corporation can manipulate constitutional law with mere money, lawyers and good ol' fashioned brute force intimidation, what do you think they can do when they want something more? Do you know how easy it is to fake a suicide or car accident?
Tsk tsk, open your eyes, welcome to the shadow world.
People always assume an assassination is a crude, violent act. Most of the time, it's an entirely separate species of beast. Most people are convinced that assassinations only happen with violence, but it's almost never the case anymore. Besides, it's much more easier to intensely discredit someone now, and absolutely humiliate them in the most absurd ways. However, if they need to be "dead", as in.. just dead for whatever reason, most 'intelligent' and calculating forces these days are already 10 steps ahead and see any sort of threat before it's ever made, so the "car accident" occurs 5 steps before there is ever suspicion.
There have been commercial airlines brought down for one single target, killing everyone else on board as well. Not too hard to trigger a 'failure' on a piece of equipment designed to rocket into the sky and fly 30,000ft in the air. When a whole jet comes crashing down, it's highly unlikely the first suspicion will be "single target assassination", but it's happened. Just saying.
Depends on the client's request. If subtlely is requested, then yes. If not, then simply use the most efficent method.superbleeder12 said:
