Soldat, as many things in life, can teach us lessons. Once particular lesson that Soldat teaches me is this:

"He who lives by the gun, dies by the gun."

Or, more accurately,

"Whether or not you live by the gun, you'll probably die by the gun."

And how about some real-life illustrations? In the world, 5% of the death toll is caused by violence (this includes suicide and war). Out of 100 people, 5 will die by the sword, gun, poison, whatever. In America, guns are legal to be owned by adult civillians who have not comitted a federal crime. A blessing, I must say, since the individual is capable of defending one's self.

Some would say, "No, that just means you've got a bunch of crazy cowboys running around with guns, ready to shoot first and ask questions later." In some cases this is true. But this is largely prevented with the common knowledge that the other guy might have a gun too, and pulling a gun on him could threaten your own life.

Again, one might say, "So get rid of the guns and you get rid of the problem." Nope. You see, if death is on your mind you can kill with a sword, a knife, a rock, a tree branch, fire, or your bare hands.

Secondly, "Getting rid of the guns" is impossible. There's always going to be some violent [:-censored] out there who invents new ways to butcher men, and if we don't defend ourselves with weapons of similar capability, the facist dictators and such can come and take the countries they please.

I've also heard some argue, "Leave the guns to the military and law enforcement. They know what they are doing." Maybe. But that leaves problems, because guns are still in the hands of regular people like you and me, and people with bad intentions can help get them into the hands of criminals, terrorists, ect. Now you've outlawed guns, and only the outlaws have guns. Mr. John Doe Serial Killer can point a gun at you, and you can call the cops and wait 5 minutes for them to show up and take your mangled body to the morgue.

But let's reduce this thinking session to a smaller scale. If you make a soldat server that's knife only, but the admin forgot to diable other weapons, you'll allways get that one retard in there who picks the Steyr or Barrett and turns your bodies in to mulch untill you vote kick him. Though the [:-censored] allready broke the rules and got what he wanted.

Similarly, in America, a 21 year old person can buy a pistol. He can carry it in most places, but some stores have signs that say "No weapons allowed on the premises." Which is actually quite idiotic. you see, a law-abiding citizen will put his gun away in his car before he goes into the building, and then Mr. John Doe quite easily breaks the rule by simply walking in with his assault rifle and robbing it, in the meantime killing the 20 law-abiding citizens inside that disarmed themselves, thanks to the rules invented by the socialist wiener, or bored housewife that runs the shop.

Almost all socialist countries (most of Europe applies here), guns are completely illegal for civillians to own. In Japan, the people there have a very real fear of guns, as if simply touching one is something bad (I know many Japanese people and have been to Japan). Yet a terrorist can come in, kill you, your family, rape your corpses, and move on to your neighbor's house, and all you can do is stand there and beg for your life.

So, do as the soldat guys do. Walk sofly and carry a big gun. There's my rant for the day. And what do you guys think on that, or any other thing that you think Soldat can teach you? :P

guns are scary. s'all I know... when you touch the real thing and know it could hurt you or someone, it's quite scary.

I don't think those that don't live by the gun, have much of a chance of dieing by it too though.

You can do the same thing with a car.

You can do the same thing with an Airplane, a lawnmower, or a chainsaw, but these items were not meant to hurt people. You're right, we need bigger weapons to protect ourselves with! When the laws are passed, I am going to make homemade napalm and kill anyone who comes near me.

So the bigger weapons we law-abiding citizens have the better? Rock on!

Gun related violence is significantly less in Canada than it is in the US. Yet there are more guns per capita (meaning to person) than there is in the US. Why this difference?

Because canada has strict regulations regarding the ownership of handguns. Yet do you hear anything about this "killing your family raping the corpses thing" up there? no.

Sorry buddy, but I just dont' buy into your NRA propaganda.

quote:Chuck Palahniuk wrote:
All a gun does is focus an explosion in one direction.

I know about Canadian gun regulations. One of their criteria is bullet velocity. Apparently, they think you will be less sucsessful at comitting murder with an M79 (which is legal there, but not legal in the USA) than with a .308 round. Gun homocide will decrease when you impose gun regulations which prevent civillians from acsessing them. Homocide in general will decrease when the populous istelf is less likely to be violent. Taking guns away from civillians does not make murder more difficult. But regardless, let me throw some numbers at you guys:

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/04/rpp04-07.pdf

This document contains homocide statiscics for Austrailia, England & Whales, Canada and USA from 1974 to 1994. Take it as you will. Though I will say that USA is definitely a more violent country.

EDIT: Another note. Rocket Propelled grenade launchers (RPG), flechette explosive 20mm grenade launchers, and all sorts of man-manglers that are illegal in USA are legal in Canada. Also, in countries like Britan and Austrailia, the violent mortality rate is lower than America, but the violent crime ratse are much higher.

I dont see this being related to soldat and is posted in soldat talk. For 2, go away. Your stupid.

"Grab your guns, boys! Get ready for Europe! We're going gypsy hunting! Yeee-haw!"

.... yes you are. Not bright at all. Missconception of a lot of things there.

I basically aggree with SP on this one. Sure, you can have guns, but the need for them doesnt depend on weather you have them or not. The crap about "if you dont have a way to protect yoursaelf, someone will come and kill you" is often, very often found in USA, where paranoia is more rampant than ignorance, offence intended. There is less crime in Europe, Canada, and Japan because these countries are simply doing better than the USA in terms of living standards. The more the people are satisfied, the less will be tempted to consider crime, makes sense? So if you go over to these countries and start talking about the quoted statement above, you will do more harm than good, because you will instill even more useless paranoia in a place where theres no need for it or for its cause.

By the way, the right to bear arms in the USA is part of the constitution, if you ever read it. It says that whenever the goverment dissatisfies the people and fails to make it up for them or change its ways, the people have the right to revolt, and so the power has to be with the people. Power meaning guns, weapons, whatever the means to counter any thought-up "solution" a tyranny or a dictatorship might use against protesting subjects. Now with the idiocy, ignorance, paranoia, and the ever greater fear of a terrorist attack, people are twisting the cause of the need for guns, even the criminal mind is subject to this. The more you hear about killing, the more relevant and morally acceptable it seems to both innocent citizen and criminal alike. So its basically your theory of "why we need guns/should have guns" that directly feeds the actual need for them.

The constitution says we have the right to bear arms. That is NOT meant for us to revolt against the government. That right allows us to defend ourselves effectively from other citizens, other countries/ whatever. The governamnet makes all these regulations on the possesion of firearms and explosove weapons and what not so that most of the high powered, super-lethal weapons are retained solely for military use, so that bthey can PREVENT any srt of rebel uprising.

No, TFS is right. The original intent was to make sure that if the government oppressed the people, they would be able to revolt and overthrow the corrupt government. Maybe that's not why people have guns now, but it WAS the original intent.

Anyway, Leiroguy, you say that all sorts of "man manglers" are legal in canada. What's your point?

The second amendment says you have the right to bear arms... as it is necessary for the maintenence of a well maintained MILITIA.

When the NRA hides behind the secodn ammendment they never quote the second part. Strange no?

i want some bear arms! RAWR I WILL HANG THEM ON MY WALL!

whould you like to summarizes that?

Well, basically, he wants to rip the arms off some bears and hang them on the wall.

thats what leiro wants to do?...haha

..well this topic has certainly drifted from soldat, but who cares, it's kinda interesting.


I can't say I know the cure or the problem for gun control....America's got it legal for guns, and we all think those texans are bloody crazy.

Britain on the other hand has it illegal to own or buy guns, and yet theres a 50% increase in firearms since the banning plus a dramatic increase in violent crime and killings. Apparently London is worse than New York, and we're damn proud. In your face, yanks.

Europe and the rest of the world however....well I'm not sure. They seem to have it under control somehow. I think they just seem to be all wised up to the fact that there isn't much of a need for them. God bless above-average nationwide education standards.



..anyhow, before we waste this topic to death with our thoughts on guns and America, what other philosophies are there to be learned from soldat?

Rable...rable rable!!

Guns = death...
swords though you can fight back...

I say... Violence in the US are mostly involved with gangs, and they're moving up here because the laws aren't that strict (no jail for life, no death penalty) so we see them around in Montreal, they're here since 2003 and the violence has seriously increased here. We've even heard about innocent peoples being killed.

I say... Violence in the US are mostly involved with gangs, and they're moving up here because the laws aren't that strict (no jail for life, no death penalty) so we see them around in Montreal, they're here since 2003 and the violence has seriously increased here. We've even heard about innocent peoples being killed.

*BZZZZRRRRRTT*

Wrong answer. Would you like to try again?

Though violent crimes do appear to lend themselves to minorities... that does not then mean they're all gang related issues, or even that gangs are the source of the violence in Montreal. I've seen no backing for this.

Strict punishment is rarely a deterrant for someone determined to commit the crime. For example, there was a time in England where pickpocketing was a crime punishable by death (hanging). and as you know, these public hangings were quite the spectacle. One of those... bring the kids sort of events. Well... did you know pickpocketing increased during that time? Why? Because at these hangings pickpockets would go all across the fair type event that surrounded the hangings, and do their deeds.

Why that little anecdote? To show that stricter punishment does not mean the crime will stop (or even slow down for that matter)

People are hightailing to Canada because they're afraid Bush is going to get reelected and instate a draft :p

People have been killing each other probably since the dawn of mankind, there is no way to stop it, in fact, it's probably the way the world will end... Get used to it, crimes and wars aren't ever going to stop, not ever, no matter how many guns you decide to burn, no matter how many criminals you decide to punish, they are not going to go.

Ok, so, we all watch stupid white men, the master agitator michael moore points out a lot of interesting facts about statistics and guns. Like, u are most likely to kill someone in your family with that nifty gun of yours. Doh!
Of course, what motivates gun ownership is prolly not only to be able to say "get da hell of ma property or betsy here will teach u a lesson", I believe that it is inspired by power. The scary tingling emotion when grasping something friggin lethal, some ppl go to far, and take it into their homes. I mean, wasnt there a crazy youngster on this very forum who had a stiffie over his paintballgun, when equipped with frozen ammo cud kill someone. Thats just sick. Plain sick even.
Now, I come from sweden, a small partially frozen country bordering to the baltic sea, and over that submarine infested pool of brackish water lies mother russia. A country who has been a threat to our little socialistic (<- hmm, europe in general is socialistic... err...? Anyways) spot of land. We never armed our self to the teeth with sub machine guns, or bigass semiautomatic shotguns, semi auto shotties arent allowed even for hunters... Still, we had a clear and present threat, even more so did finland. Still, not that many guns in the house, other than for hunting.
Heh, im ranting, sorry.
Now, of course canada cud invade the US, or not, they seem a friendly bunch. Or, mexico? hmm, not going to happen no? So, that leaves us with our neighbours, and, start making an arms race with yer neighbours, and, itll turn into a warzone, which, incidently is happening.
Now, I dislike weaponurgers everywhere, it just seems that, the good nation of USA, have had the unfortunate toss of the dice and have had a social/cultural course to make guns so common and accepted. Of course, not all are alike, hell no, im not a big fan of michael moore, hes a bit reckless with his sources, but, he says a few good things. One that i do enjoy to the fullest are for example Ani difranco, (http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/anidifranco/totheteeth.html), or of course, noam chomsky (<- PWN).
There are many voices of reason in america, but, they are having trouble being heard, and, since a country the size of the US is like an oiltanker, it takes a while to turn it around, I guess only time will tell if violence and death will decrease. I for one doesnt think that guns have made it better.
/Mariachi

middle ages of soldat... swords... axes... arrows...daggers... muskets... crossbows... that would be cool...

I love crossbows. I personally prefer a longbow, recurve, or reflex compound bows, though. Standard compound crossbows and bows are way too grotesque and seem like cheating. Crossbows also have tremendous knockdown power. Then you can choose between broadhead or bodkin bolts, for flesh trauma or armor piercing, and you've got quite a weapon. I've been trying to work out my own personal invention, which incorporates a lawn dart design with a weighted tip and a massive broadhead.

I am the personal owner of a longsword myself, too. But I prefer axes or scimitars, since a slashing/chopping motion is a lot easier to do sucsessfully than a jab. But I'm a member of the fencing club so I can use it. Not as well as a rapier, though.

yes scimitars are cool... 2nd favorite sword... katanas the best overall.
In the middle ages swords and arrows were used. i would like to live in that day... i'm very good with a sword

Play Dungeons & Dragons.
Katanas are great. Well, real Katanas. Hand-made ones of combat quality are in the tens of thousands of dollars. If you want something combat-ready but manufactured, go with something made by Cold Steel. They make Katanas of practical combat value and good quality, especially since they use the cold steel forging proscess. Another note, in those days, Katanas were limited to Samurai only. Not just anyone could get them. Then again, when it comes to price-per-kill, you might want to look into other non-bladed weapons, like a mace, morningstar, or flail.

I have a Katana, it's not a "REAL" one that can cut peoples in half of course, it's for Iaido.

Another thing to note is the quality of a real katana. Look at a katana and put it next to a longsword from the same era. Notice that the european sword is dented... shot to hell.. .and rusted. While the Katana likely looks as good as the day it was forged.

Something about folding steel 100 times is just impressive to me :p

Nice kenshin gif, btw Duke

Plus, folding the steel gives it a hightened durability and flexibility. It'll be harder to bend permanentally as to damage the actual blade, but it will bend with little force to transfer some of the striking power away from the blade itself, preserving its shape and original form.

Another thing to note is the slight curve of the Katana which makes it so deadly. The curve enables a smoother cut when one is slashing, and deflects the striking force from the wielder's wrist, so when you slash something with a European longsword, it'd hurt much more than with a Japanese katana. Some people have even broke their wrists swinging straight 2-handed blades with all of their might, using the momentum of their bodies as a whole - a pretty awesome force, but directed straight at ones wrists is very...regrettable :)

I know it's a little late to write this, but what the hell.
quote:Originally posted by lieroguy
Similarly, in America, a 21 year old person can buy a pistol. He can carry it in most places, but some stores have signs that say "No weapons allowed on the premises." Which is actually quite idiotic. you see, a law-abiding citizen will put his gun away in his car before he goes into the building, and then Mr. John Doe quite easily breaks the rule by simply walking in with his assault rifle and robbing it, in the meantime killing the 20 law-abiding citizens inside that disarmed themselves, thanks to the rules invented by the socialist wiener, or bored housewife that runs the shop.

Liero, tell me; what's the chances that you'll walk into a store, then a man walks in with an assault rifle, out numbered 20 to one kill everyone in the store and gets away free? Hardly ever.
But saying that having a gun is for your own security, that's understandable, I mean how many people who have guns just for security's sake kill other people? But there's probably a one in a million chance that you'd be attacked by a terrorist.
You say that japs are scared of guns, true true. When i went to japan for 3 days We came across an anti firearms parade, weird [:-censored]. But because you dont have a gun doesnt mean it makes you immeadeately vunerable to a terrorist. Like my parents have been unarmed for the past 50 years or so, have they been shot or attacked by a terrorist? No.
And anyways, a gun is useless in most terroist situations.
Lets take 9/11 for example.
What difference would a gun make in that terrorist attack? Nothing.
And same with most terrorist situations. They come unexpectedly. And even though you may be armed to the teeth, if a terrorist unexpectedly attacks you, you'd be dead, no matter how well armed you are.
So in conclusion you're a little scared [:-censored], you think against the odds of one in a million you'd be killed by some crazy gun crazy son of a bitch. Goddamnit there's a better chance that you'd be struck by lighting than get killed by a crazy son of a bitch. Seriously dude, you need to stop [:-censored]ting your pants at everything. relax damn you RELAX.

If you're looking for a nice battle-ready Katana, check this link out:
http://www.coldsteel.com/88kwarser.html
Or, for a more practical blade:
http://www.coldsteel.com/fixed-blades-gurkhas.html
http://www.coldsteel.com/fixed-blades-peace-keepers.html

Though there will always be a place in my heart for Katanas. I personally prefer to train dual-weapon though, and a Katana is a bit large to be wielded with one hand. I go with a deflective blade and a kukri for delivering counter blows. If you're going for a single light blade and are not a specialist, go with a double-edged knife.

mmmm i whish i had a katana.
but suprisingly none of my relatives have katana's :O.
Probably cos in my mums home provence, okinawa, they never used swords. It sounds sad, but they fought each other with karate. Some [:-censored] like that.
=\

Hey at least be proud of that :P Karate was made for self-defense without any weapon at all against an armed (and propably armored) opponent. I mean, taking down a fighter with any weapon hand to hand with no weapon of your own is just amazing, those guys were hard.

But when talking about the combat styles of the middle ages, one must not forget the simplicity and universality of the humble spear or the japaneese yari.If your opponent can't get close to you, you can still defeat him with this weapon, although on close range, there is a fine chance of you geting wasted.

I remember old tales that were told by my grandfather, and later on by my history teacher, that the huns, had a divine combat style: while riding a horse, they imitated fleeing, and the enemies went after them, only to find the awesome force of the accurate hun bowing.They could hit an armored knight in the eye from 150 feet away while riding a horse and facing backwards.

(I'd like to see THAT in soldat >:])

wait so you want people to be lured into traps in soldat...o.O sounds alright.
And you might also be thinking of aikido rather than karate.
Karate is fighting with out weapons were as Aikido uses your oponents strenghth against themselves.
Something like that =\

I study Aikido. And you're right, it is designed entirely to disarm, pin, and take down an apponet with as little harm as possible by countering their exertion via manipulation of leverage, blanace, and inflexibility.

Oh, and by the way, something else to read, a humorous and sarchastic list that plays on the ironies of the American system of rights:
http://www.attrition.org/technical/firearms/40_gun_control.html
Take it as you will. Which is exactly what you're all going to do.

Also, if you press the "Back" button on the bottom of the page, you can see a lot of other info.

People don't kill people, guns do, it's a medical fact

Bullets do, actually.

*adds to the nonsense*

pff I knew someone would say that...

Sigh... why do I always reply to the threads with massive posts.

quote:Originally posted by that fuking sniper
By the way, the right to bear arms in the USA is part of the constitution, if you ever read it. It says that whenever the goverment dissatisfies the people and fails to make it up for them or change its ways, the people have the right to revolt, and so the power has to be with the people. Power meaning guns, weapons, whatever the means to counter any thought-up "solution" a tyranny or a dictatorship might use against protesting subjects. Now with the idiocy, ignorance, paranoia, and the ever greater fear of a terrorist attack, people are twisting the cause of the need for guns, even the criminal mind is subject to this. The more you hear about killing, the more relevant and morally acceptable it seems to both innocent citizen and criminal alike. So its basically your theory of "why we need guns/should have guns" that directly feeds the actual need for them.


I read an article on that. There was a case that was taken to a high level court, concerning the expelling of guns. I don't know exactly what went on, but "all"(supposedly) the good and bad sides of the issue were presented, yet no action was taken. I think that in the end, it comes down to the way you look at it. Point of view.

Negative: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Positive: "But guns give people the power to kill people."

Negative: "People will always have the power to kill people."

Positive: "So why not try to practically cut that power in half by elimination guns?"

Just a small example. I bet that's what most arguments look like when it comes down to guns. The thing is, one point of view can't beat the other perspective. They end up evened out, and the argument either ends with no effect, or it never ends.

Edit: quote:Originally posted by karmazonpl
People don't kill people, guns do, it's a medical fact


Haha, I didn't even read that when I posted.

swords are better... they can refelct bullets

Maybe pistol rounds could be stopped by a sword, but definitely not reflected. When a bullet hits something squarely that it can't penetrate, it flattens and falls over. Unless you've got copper or steel jacketed pistol rounds, which in this case would porobably ricochet for a short ways in an uncontrollable direction. A jacketed rifle round would probably just penetrate a cheaper sword, and break your wrists if you're holding a tough sword.

I myself prefer molotov cocktails because theres not much you can do with it to prevent someone getting burned (hopefully to death)

Scenario:
I'm holding cocktail and I'm threatening to throw it at someone unless they give me all their money. Why I want money or am resorting to a molotov cocktail as a weapon I don't know. Cops show and try to get me to put it down. They either
A:Shoot cocktail out of hand causing it to catch fire and I burn
B:Shoot me causing me to throw/drop cocktail causing someone to burn
C:Give into my demands and I throw Cocktail at them anyway
D:Run at me with a sword/knife and I throw the cocktail in their face
E:Cut me in half/Stab me with katan/knife I drop molotov cocktail it breaks I burn
F:Tear gas me causing me to get angry and throw the molotov cocktail at the cop
G:Send in a negotiator who talks me to my senses. Then once I see through his lies I throw cocktail at him
H:Sends in my parents to negotiate. I hate my parents so I burn them anyway
I:Send in my friends to negotiate. I can then
I.A:Corrupt them to join my side and get more molotov cocktails
I.B:Burn them for helping the enemy
J:Superman comes and uses his laser vision to melt the bottle causing contents to spill and I catch on fire
K:Superman uses ice breath but alcohol does not freeze so when I fall over frozen my body shatters and the contents spill causing my corpse to light on fire

As you can clearly see from the scenarios given above molotov is clearly the best choice as a weapon.

i'll go with H

The problem with a molotov cocktailis that you can't throw it 1000 yards at a man-sized target.

Molotov was such a cool guy, though. I've love to have the name "Molotov" (Sledgehammer).

It's funny that some people think that molotov cocktail was invented by molotov...
common sense can be deceiving(or however you spell it)

Well, I was inclined to believe as a guy from Russia was the one who told me that. :)