I know this may be morbid but so be it, just as the subject said would you
rather be killed by the bullet of a gun or the blade of a sword? My thoughts
are by the sword as a warrior.
If the person attacking me is skilled, then definitely a gun. If the person is
just pyscho loony then probably a sword. I'm thinking the actual dying process
(AKA bleeding out) would be faster that way. Now if your talking about a
military grade machine gun, then I would stay with the gun.
I'm kind of ticklish and don't like to be poked so I think I would prefer to be
shot. Unless being shot tickles too, then I would just say no thank you to both
of them.
Quote by toutousaiI'm kind of ticklish
and don't like to be poked so I think I would prefer to be shot. Unless being
shot tickles too, then I would just say no thank you to both of
them.
o.,0 ok and, i think it would depend on the situation me vs lots of ppl i'd say
guns...automatics for that matter,but just a one on one i think i'd go with
swords
What are you guys crazy? Why do you want to die in the first place? Then
again, if you can choose.......i'd choose the gun. With the sword, you would
get hacked and slash and could be painful like the gun if it doesn't hit you in
the arm or something. I'd rather get shot. Quick and almost painless.
I would most prefer to die of old age. ...However... Given the choice... ...It
would be disgraceful in the modern era to get killed by a sword. ...So I think
I'll go with "gun".
these are all good opinions but don't you think it would be alot more honorable
to die by the blade from warriors of the past rather than something that takes
almost no skill and cannot be considered a "warriors" weapon?
Using a firearm properly isn't a simple matter. Ironically, it may even require
more skill, as the things that can kill you is everything within half a mile or
so... ...As opposed to a sword or even a throwing weapon... ...Properly using
and maintaining a firearm in combat requires both dicipline and intellegence...
...Probably moreso than the blades of yore. ...Of course, I'm not a soldier,
etc. ...So I could be wrong.
I asked this in the thread that spawned this one, and haven't gotten an answer
yet: what makes a sword (either killing with or dying by) more honorable than a
gun? The end result is the same, in that a person is turned into lunchmeat for
worms and maggots.
Quote: and cannot be considered a
"warriors" weapon
Just what grants you the authority to judge what is a "warrior's
weapon" and what isn't?
Further, where do bows and crossbows fit into this equation? They take skill to
use properly (as do guns, even if it doesn't seem like it), but they kill from a
distance, which "true warriors" consider "cowardly",
"dishonorable", and beneath their dignity. That's certainy how the
French knights felt about being shot to pieces by lowborn English yeomanry armed
with longbows on the fields at Crecy and Agincourt.
Quote by LordSI asked this in the thread
that spawned this one, and haven't gotten an answer yet: what makes a sword
(either killing with or dying by) more honorable than a
gun?
I don't think there is an honorable way to die. There is no honor in death
while battling because it means you failed. I don't think it is particularly
honorable to kill at all; however, I would say that if you were fighting a
one-on-one face to face duel it would be more risky and thereby more honorable
(such as with swords) than if you shot him from the other side of the room. I
didn't come up with this theory though. My reasons from the previous thread
were: that there is a great deal more personal danger when you're fighting face
to face with swords. Your opponent has a better chance of winning than if you
are using superior technology. If you bomb him from a plane unexpectedly, he
really doesn't have any chance at all.
Hmm... probably a sword if it was someone skilled. And probably a gun if it was
some crazy person because if the crazy person had a sword they can slice you for
their own pleasure and with a gun even if they shoot your leg or somthing you
will die sooner cause blood loss.
actually I am a student of the martial arts and do follow the code of the
bushido. it tells of the honorable way of death as well as life.....please
research this LordStyphon, and please excuse the rudeness of my answer as I
appologize.
Ah, good. In that case, maybe you can explain to me just how death by sword is
more honorable or otherwise preferable than dying by firearms. I could actually
read up on it myself, but that would take time, and since you, a follower of
Bushido, are here, and know how it all works, you should be able to tell me why
death from one kind of weapon is spiritually better than death by another
kind.
You must understand, good sir, that I am of the school that teaches that
weapons, whatever their form, are all tools designed for the purpose of
inflicting harm. Furthermore, being inanimate objects, weapons lack the
capability to be "good" or "evil", or to have any traits we
might assign to a human being. Taken together, this makes them functionally and
morally equivalent.
So, please, sir, explain to me by what formula that equivalence has been altered
in your view. And, in so doing, please don't just tell me to research the code
of Bushido; I want you to tell me yourself.
it is more honorable to die by a sword because the person you are doing battle
with is in front of you and you are at the same advantages and disadvantages as
your opponent, unlike a gun which most times you have no idea where they are
shooting at and they can kill you by shooting you in the back at that distance
which is cowardly. So therefore because you are on even ground with your
opponent with a sword the best warrior will win but the loser of the battle can
die rest assured they tried their hardest to defend their honor, and thus an
honorable death and a true warriors death. I hope this explains what I was
talking about and explains the bushido a little more.
Quote by LordStyphonAh, good. In that
case, maybe you can explain to me just how death by sword is more honorable or
otherwise preferable than dying by firearms. I could actually read up on it
myself, but that would take time, and since you, a follower of Bushido, are
here, and know how it all works, you should be able to tell me why death from
one kind of weapon is spiritually better than death by another kind.
You must understand, good sir, that I am of the school that teaches that
weapons, whatever their form, are all tools designed for the purpose of
inflicting harm. Furthermore, being inanimate objects, weapons lack the
capability to be "good" or "evil", or to have any traits we
might assign to a human being. Taken together, this makes them functionally and
morally equivalent.
So, please, sir, explain to me by what formula that equivalence has been altered
in your view. And, in so doing, please don't just tell me to research the code
of Bushido; I want you to tell me yourself.
no weapon is evil. the one holding is the one you judge not the weapon.
but truefully i'd would rather be killed by a sword because it was always a
weapon i would of loved to learn to use and...the code of Bushido is quite
honorable.
I know this may be morbid but so be it, just as the subject said would you rather be killed by the bullet of a gun or the blade of a sword? My thoughts are by the sword as a warrior.
If the person attacking me is skilled, then definitely a gun. If the person is just pyscho loony then probably a sword. I'm thinking the actual dying process (AKA bleeding out) would be faster that way. Now if your talking about a military grade machine gun, then I would stay with the gun.
I'm kind of ticklish and don't like to be poked so I think I would prefer to be shot. Unless being shot tickles too, then I would just say no thank you to both of them.
o.,0 ok and, i think it would depend on the situation me vs lots of ppl i'd say guns...automatics for that matter,but just a one on one i think i'd go with swords
What are you guys crazy? Why do you want to die in the first place? Then again, if you can choose.......i'd choose the gun. With the sword, you would get hacked and slash and could be painful like the gun if it doesn't hit you in the arm or something. I'd rather get shot. Quick and almost painless.
I would most prefer to die of old age. ...However... Given the choice... ...It would be disgraceful in the modern era to get killed by a sword. ...So I think I'll go with "gun".
these are all good opinions but don't you think it would be alot more honorable to die by the blade from warriors of the past rather than something that takes almost no skill and cannot be considered a "warriors" weapon?
Using a firearm properly isn't a simple matter. Ironically, it may even require more skill, as the things that can kill you is everything within half a mile or so... ...As opposed to a sword or even a throwing weapon... ...Properly using and maintaining a firearm in combat requires both dicipline and intellegence... ...Probably moreso than the blades of yore. ...Of course, I'm not a soldier, etc. ...So I could be wrong.
I asked this in the thread that spawned this one, and haven't gotten an answer yet: what makes a sword (either killing with or dying by) more honorable than a gun? The end result is the same, in that a person is turned into lunchmeat for worms and maggots.
Just what grants you the authority to judge what is a "warrior's weapon" and what isn't?
Further, where do bows and crossbows fit into this equation? They take skill to use properly (as do guns, even if it doesn't seem like it), but they kill from a distance, which "true warriors" consider "cowardly", "dishonorable", and beneath their dignity. That's certainy how the French knights felt about being shot to pieces by lowborn English yeomanry armed with longbows on the fields at Crecy and Agincourt.
I don't think there is an honorable way to die. There is no honor in death while battling because it means you failed. I don't think it is particularly honorable to kill at all; however, I would say that if you were fighting a one-on-one face to face duel it would be more risky and thereby more honorable (such as with swords) than if you shot him from the other side of the room. I didn't come up with this theory though. My reasons from the previous thread were: that there is a great deal more personal danger when you're fighting face to face with swords. Your opponent has a better chance of winning than if you are using superior technology. If you bomb him from a plane unexpectedly, he really doesn't have any chance at all.
I'd rather see the person that strikes me down up cloce and personal rather than some random bullet from a distance
but avoiding death would be more preferable =]
Hmm... probably a sword if it was someone skilled. And probably a gun if it was some crazy person because if the crazy person had a sword they can slice you for their own pleasure and with a gun even if they shoot your leg or somthing you will die sooner cause blood loss.
im always dreaming of getting shot so by the way of the gun i suppose. but i would prefer a quick and easy death any day.
bye the sword, that way I have a chance to take them with Me
I want to die by a gun but the guy who will fire at better not to miss is shot... I can't stand to see a part of myself be separated from my corps
LordStyphon - have you heard of the bushido code? ya might wanna check that our before running your mouth.
As a matter of fact, I have heard of Bushido. Now, what does it have to do with anything? Are you a samurai? An active pracitioner of the code?
That doesn't answer my original question, by the way.
actually I am a student of the martial arts and do follow the code of the bushido. it tells of the honorable way of death as well as life.....please research this LordStyphon, and please excuse the rudeness of my answer as I appologize.
Ah, good. In that case, maybe you can explain to me just how death by sword is more honorable or otherwise preferable than dying by firearms. I could actually read up on it myself, but that would take time, and since you, a follower of Bushido, are here, and know how it all works, you should be able to tell me why death from one kind of weapon is spiritually better than death by another kind.
You must understand, good sir, that I am of the school that teaches that weapons, whatever their form, are all tools designed for the purpose of inflicting harm. Furthermore, being inanimate objects, weapons lack the capability to be "good" or "evil", or to have any traits we might assign to a human being. Taken together, this makes them functionally and morally equivalent.
So, please, sir, explain to me by what formula that equivalence has been altered in your view. And, in so doing, please don't just tell me to research the code of Bushido; I want you to tell me yourself.
it is more honorable to die by a sword because the person you are doing battle with is in front of you and you are at the same advantages and disadvantages as your opponent, unlike a gun which most times you have no idea where they are shooting at and they can kill you by shooting you in the back at that distance which is cowardly. So therefore because you are on even ground with your opponent with a sword the best warrior will win but the loser of the battle can die rest assured they tried their hardest to defend their honor, and thus an honorable death and a true warriors death. I hope this explains what I was talking about and explains the bushido a little more.
well if I want to die quickly then i'll be shot. If i wanna die painfully then I'm going to die in an honorable way.
you can die quicker by a master swordsman than you can by a bullet.....
no weapon is evil. the one holding is the one you judge not the weapon.
but truefully i'd would rather be killed by a sword because it was always a weapon i would of loved to learn to use and...the code of Bushido is quite honorable.
a bullet in the head, please ^^''