Sunday, July 25, 2010

Reasons Why Swords Are Better Than Guns

After a day's worth of Lord of the Rings, I've been enlightened. If you are close enough to hack someone with a sword, you're close enough to kill them. Swords require no ammunition; only dependent on your own stamina and cunning. A skillful swordsman would separate the gun from whomever it is he's up against. And an inexperienced swordsman would most likely run around frantically, waiting till all bullets are fired, the quiet breath, before lunging. In either of those situations, an accurate or beginning marksman would not return home, regardless of weapon variety, range, or rate of fire. A shotgun calls for close quarters, a more beneficial situation for the swordsman. Rifles have various reload times from a few seconds to an eternity, a deadly chink for someone with a weapon cutting through air. Automatic weapons fire small bullets that can be deflected by the steel of the sword or protected by cover, in this case, a shield would be extremely helpful with either though not necessary. Accurate or not, a trigger outright fails to a hilt. If you want a fair match, imagine a marksman and a swordsman with one weapon of choice; the swordsman would have his sword while the marksman would have a firearm, any of your choosing, but with only one bullet. Sounds fair if we are talking only one weapon.

No comments:

Post a Comment