Just a little thing that has my curiosity worked to the bone .
Which does more damage a gun or a sword ?
Think about it , a bullet can hit it's target in the arm , and the victim can survive . Yet a well placed sword stroke and suddenly the victim needs an amputation . It honestly makes me wonder.....
well i rather go against a man with a sword then a gun in a fight.
__________________ With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.These words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie -- as awisdom, and warning. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged.
"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half.-----Sir Winston Churchill
guns are more efficient as its harder to dodge them n they are easier to carry/conceal, and mostly HANDLE, they also have the advantage of range, however as far as wounds that are INFLICTED go, a sword is much MUCH more deadlier than even a 50 caliber gun.
Yup all that movie stuff has let people think swords are the BOMB! Yeah give me a gun and a silencer and its ALOT quiter then most swords and axes cutting through someone
50 caliber is overkill You take 3-4 9mm rounds and that can drop you one 45 round etc etc and its safer for the shooter................
Yeah, if somebody saw Kill Bill without knowing any better (a.k.a. most of its viewers), you'd think you could achieve global domination with just a blade.
__________________
Last edited by botankus on Feb 8th, 2006 at 05:51 PM
KMC Community Forums
Feb 8th, 2006 04:37 PM
By Barker
