Poll: What is your stance on weapons?

Recommended Videos

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
Youre less of a man to rely solely on a gun in my family, cause theres no joy or skill or challenge in killing something from several hundred or thousand yards away. Hell, we dont even hunt with rifles (though we do have permits for guns and own them), we hunt with bows and knives.

Now because its just not logistical to carry a sword around with me everywhere (cause god knows I would and god help the fool who forces me to use it) Ive gotten into the habit of carrying a Bowie Knife in my home town cause apparently the cool thing nowadays is to carry a switchblade or butterfly knife and act like your cool and tough and in a gang/military unit (respectively). And because weapon equals instant empowerment crime is somewhat up. Which isnt to say that people arent using guns int heir crimes, just Ive been in fewer situations where a gun was used rather then a knife of some kind in my personal experiences.

So yeah, I see them as acceptable in the right hands for the right uses. I use my bowie more for household stuff than fighting all told. Stuff like rewiring and wood carving and such.
 

ImperialSunlight

New member
Nov 18, 2009
1,269
0
0
I prefer a sword but obviously that wouldn't be very inconspicuous. I do carry a Swiss army knife, though, for self defence and emergencies.
 

GraveeKing

New member
Nov 15, 2009
621
0
0
You should probably add a 'none' to the poll for people like me, rather than just having to say 'other'.

Any-who! I don't believe in weapons, in my eyes - if someone really is going to hurt or mug you, there's no point putting up some stupid fight with a gun or knife. They probably know what they're doing more than you and are more likely to not hesitate - and if you're just as aggressive then really.... Something is wrong with you!

That and really, if you live somewhere in a city or part of the world here you need to carry a weapon to be safe.... I think moving away as soon as possible would be my own personal choice! It's why I refuse to move to anywhere too populated in England and never go anywhere I deem unsafe in America - call me paranoid but I don't really trust a country where anyone can carry a gun as 'safe'.
 

alandavidson

New member
Jun 21, 2010
961
0
0
getoffmycloud said:
SixWingedAsura said:
I like swords. Sure, guns are better killers, but to truly master a sword, one must dedicated oneself to the blade and what wielding that blade entails. Any dumbass can pick up a gun and fire off a few rounds, but few know the intricacies of steel to steel combat. And I can respect that.
Believe me firing a gun is far more difficult than it looks especially at longer ranges.
Try this: Four men, four guns, all firing in close quarters at targets literally inches away from both your buddies and stuff (aka: people) you really don't want to hit. You have to be an absolute master shooter in order to pull that off.

Plus there's also this:

 

goldendriger

New member
Dec 21, 2010
247
0
0
Cant carry a weapon, but id love to. Id go with Knife since A- Knives are small and consealable for a suprise (Suppose thats why they're banned) And B- Im a trained knife fighter i feel more comfortable with a blade than with a gun.
 

Trivun

Stabat mater dolorosa
Dec 13, 2008
9,831
0
0
I don't carry weapons, never have done and unless I join the armed forces or the police (even then it would have to be the armed division), I doubt I ever will. I don't live in a very dangerous area, and I've always been firmly of the belief that outside the military the only people who should be carrying weapons are the police, and even then only when fully trained in their use and when used sensibly and in the right scenario or context. Believe it or not, but I trust the UK police, and the way this country is going I feel it's getting to the point where either we bring back corporal and capital punishment, and harsher sentencing, or the police have weapons as standard. Or even both combined.

If I did carry a weapon, though, it would have to be a gun. At the end of the day I don't like getting into physical altercations, though I can hold my own in a fight purely because as well as being fast rather than strong, I know that fights have absolutely no rules. I don't give a flying fuck about honour in a fight, the aim is just to hurt the opponent as much as possible, unless it's a sport (where I'd follow the rules) - hell, I'd even bite someone if I was fighting them if it would help me win. But I digress. I don't enjoy getting into fights, so I'd much rather carry a ranged weapon, something that lets me win without the need to get up close and personal. Ergo, a gun.

EDIT: To be fair, I also know how to use a gun, whereas I don't know how to effectively wield other weapons. Unlike with knives, I've actually been trained on using several rifles including air rifles and the L-98, and I fired pistols on shooting ranges too. Which is fairly odd given I'm from the gun-phobic UK, and most of my gun training came from after-school activities supported by my old high school/sixth form. Anyhow, I know how to use a gun better than anything else, particularly how difficult they can be to use effectively...
 

MrJKapowey

New member
Oct 31, 2010
1,669
0
0
I'd carry an 'Other', probably a rifle as I can use them. Obviously this wouldn'twork IRL but under any situation I would choose a rifle to defend myself. Preferably the L98/85/86/22 A2 as I have current Weapon Handling Tests passed on he '98 and '86. The L85 ran out a few weeks ago and I've never used an L22. Since they're all effectively the same (bar things like heavier barrels and fire selector switches) I could use any of them with equal efficiancy.
 

lizards

New member
Jan 20, 2009
1,159
0
0
Fieldy409 said:
yeah i usually carry around two sawn off shotguns, two 10mm pistols, a pair of machetes and a grenade.

i have to wear a big coat though to conceal them.
sawn shotguns sound terrifing, like they have saws on them or something
 

goldendriger

New member
Dec 21, 2010
247
0
0
vxicepickxv said:
Anybody know how much damage a man can do with a 3" knife?
UK Huh? Well i suppose a shit load of damage if you went for their eye or throat, but generally just bleeding and soft tissue damage, but i doubt you'll get any vital organs with a 3 inch blade
 

Shoqiyqa

New member
Mar 31, 2009
1,266
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Shoqiyqa said:
Considering we're a bit smaller than Manitoba or Alberta, about the same as Queensland and New South Wales together, and have a population going on 70 million,
Hey? NSW is about 3.5 times the size of the UK, which is about the same size as Victoria.
Ah, yes. I was worried that google maps might have distortion issues at different latitudes, which was why I used the Canadian rather than US locations. I didn't think it'd be that big, though. I couldn't really use anything 54 degrees south, as there isn't a right lot of land there. I shall remove the error and leave my post West-of-Baghdad-and-North-of-Marrakesh-centric.
 

Jodah

New member
Aug 2, 2008
2,280
0
0
lacktheknack said:
I want the local laws to rearrange so that I can carry a can of Mace. Or a taser.

Currently, I'm left with my hands, feet and teeth, and a nice long jail sentence because damn you if you try to defend yourself. Makes me feel all safe when I walk home at night.
I know the feeling. Until a year ago it was illegal to possess any non-lethal method of self defense besides a pocket knife. Last year they finally legalized mace. Still no taser or anything else. Ironically it is legal to have and carry a handgun with a permit here (New York State) but even with said permit, I cannot legally own a taser.
 

Shoqiyqa

New member
Mar 31, 2009
1,266
0
0
Canned Spam said:
I don't have weapons, I don't need any and they're heavily restricted. If I did somehow get into a situation where I need one I'd have to pick orbital lasers. I'd probably get caught in the blast, but it'd be damn awesome.
What orbit? If they're in geostationary or any conventional geosynchronous orbit you can only hit places you could usefully mount a satellite TV dish, so not the shady side of anything tall and solid, and even then you're going to get lag as the system aligns plus dispersion making it less effective and more of an AoE weapon as you get further from the equator. If you go with the fast-moving polar orbits like photint satellites, you can hit anywhere on Earth from within 15 degrees of vertical within the next {timeframe} and the more satellites you have up there the sooner it'll be but there's still up to {timeframe} delay so it's more of an alternative to an LGB airstrike than an immediate tactical action. If you go with the highly elliptical orbits you get a lot more time-on-target thanks to the long trip out to the apogee and back, but you have to shoot from a greater distance too.

Also, you'd have to get coordinates for the target and upload them, like 51.645689,-0.044091 [http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.645689,-0.044091&spn=0.000571,0.001195&t=h&z=20&vpsrc=6] to be accurate to ... umm ... four inches. Okay, so google maps will let you be really precise. Still, if you round off the last figure you're only going to be accurate to 42 inches, aka 1.062 metres, which isn't really enough accuracy when you're trying to hit a mugger and not his victim, even before you take into account that GPS systems in a hurry aren't all that good yet.
A standard GPS receiver for civil use offers an accuracy down to a few meters. In praxis the number and geometry of the received satellites influences the accuracy considerably, and in daily use, accuracies of about 20 m can be expected. More sophisticated GPS receivers as they can be found for land survey cost several thousand dollars and achieve an accuracy of a few centimetres. [http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/accuracy.htm]
They're a support weapon, not an infantry weapon. Think of them in the role of the 115mm light gun or 81mm mortar at the least, not that of the rifle or smg, and probably more likely in the 155mm howitzer role considering how expensive satellites and satellite launches are.

Also also: consider your comsec. Every time you want to use it you have to transmit target coords somehow, and that means you can be located and/or jammed and it has to listen so maybe it can be hacked.

Custard_Angel said:
One day I'd like to get a license for a .357 magnum. I don't really believe a gun is necessary for protection or anything like that, and I'd never dream of using it on a person (or even threatening them), but I'd like to have one to take to a range or a farm or somewhere and shoot stuff.
If that's all you want to do with it, seriously compare ammunition prices before you choose a calibre. You can get a lot more plinking for your $100 in .22LR than you can in .357 Mag.

TFielding said:
If an M9 Beretta gets into the hand of an inexperienced user, there is a good chance that they could slice part of their thumb off.
Saved someone from doing that once. She then rested her left thumb tip against the side of the slide instead of across the back of it, which wasn't comfortable but didn't cause injury. Then she took my advice about putting it against her right middle finger.
 

Mr.Squishy

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,990
0
0
Weapons fascinate me, but I don't wear or use them. I love seeing them tested on Deadliest Warrior tho.
 

Custard_Angel

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,236
0
0
tjcross said:
a sword is practical as long as you have space to use it.
'Nuff said.

Besides... Consider 2 scenarios where someone is approaching another person with the intent to kill.

In one scenario the person is carrying a broadsword. In the other scenario the person has a magnum in his pocket.

Who stands the greatest chance of successfully killing the other person?

Also, a sword is only defensive against melee weapons. Guns are offensive in all situations.

Also, a sword requires extensive training to be useful. A gun can be used by anyone without any formal training.

There is something... Broken about a situation where a casual gunman could successfully kill a grandmaster swordsman, when an amateur swordsman could not do the same to an expert gunman.

TL;DR - You're living in a fantasy world. There's a reason swords aren't used in combat anymore.
 

tjcross

New member
Apr 14, 2008
342
0
0
Custard_Angel said:
tjcross said:
a sword is practical as long as you have space to use it.
'Nuff said.

Besides... Consider 2 scenarios where someone is approaching another person with the intent to kill.

In one scenario the person is carrying a broadsword. In the other scenario the person has a magnum in his pocket.

Who stands the greatest chance of successfully killing the other person?

Also, a sword is only defensive against melee weapons. Guns are offensive in all situations.

Also, a sword requires extensive training to be useful. A gun can be used by anyone without any formal training.

There is something... Broken about a situation where a casual gunman could successfully kill a grandmaster swordsman, when an amateur swordsman could not do the same to an expert gunman.

TL;DR - You're living in a fantasy world. There's a reason swords aren't used in combat anymore.
i never said that a sword would beat a gun and in fact said that a gun is more effective however what i am saying is that a sword is a lethal weapon and has a practical use in essence it is a long knife you claim it to be useless because a more powerful tool exists which means you missed the point so allow to to tell it as simply as possible because you obviously can't understand normal english. SWORD SHARP SWORD HURT WHEN GET HIT BY IT.
 

CannibalCorpses

New member
Aug 21, 2011
987
0
0
I don't carry weapons but they are illegal. I do have a samurai sword at the side of my bed for emergency burglar eviction though :) It's got a nice knife in the handle aswell so if there are more than 1 i've still got a good chance of walking myself into a cell after using them