random question i s'pose.
2007-03-19 05:41:04 · 17 answers · asked by that guy 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Swords and guns are inanimate objects and as such pose no threat in and of themselves. They become potentially dangerous (or unsafe) when they fall into the hands of an untrained or unqualified person, or an individual whose aim is to use them illegally. In this instance, I would suppose a gun would be the least "safe" of the two, since most guns (handguns, rifles, shotguns) are capable of firing multiple rounds from cylinders, magazines, or clips. Personally, I would prefer not being on the receiving end of either a sword blade or a bullet from a gun.
2007-03-19 05:51:54 · answer #1 · answered by Misanthrope 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Which would you feel safer knowing the guy next to you was going to whip it out in two minutes and counting? Which safer for you if you are armed with it?
Yeah. Maybe a little too random.
2007-03-19 05:43:58 · answer #2 · answered by Winston Smith 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends. I'd actually say a sword. A sword, if hit well can rip organs... to pieces, however a wound from a shot that is weak can be healed. However both can be equally dangerous.... just depends on what you do and where
2007-03-19 05:44:29 · answer #3 · answered by ღ♥ღ latoya 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Marine sergeant is correct.
A gun can be unloaded while a sword cannot. And it is a lot easier to hurt yourself/another with a sword than with a gun.
2007-03-19 06:18:48 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My 17yo old son says if you want to be protected from Zombies...definitely the Sword is what you want. But just to have around the house...a sword is generally safer, they don't go off with mishandling.
2007-03-19 05:52:53 · answer #5 · answered by Melanie A 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A gun can be unloaded. A sword still has its edge, even while in its scabbard.
And its true that blades account for far more injuries in any hospital and are usually worst than wounds from bullets. Bullets cauterize blades don't.
2007-03-19 05:44:12 · answer #6 · answered by Centurion529 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
blades are actually more dangereous than guns, talk to any doctor. Bullets rupture, usually just go right through but blades severe causing much more damage. Cops are trained that a perp with a blade has a danger radius of 10 ft, if I remember correctly.
2007-03-19 05:43:54 · answer #7 · answered by ark 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
a sword, there is a smaller chance that the person could accidently hurt someone. With a gun you could accidently pull the trigger and hurt yourself or someone else.
2007-03-19 05:49:30 · answer #8 · answered by erindrozda 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not even a gun can defeat the Wu-Tang Swordstyle. Protect ya neck!!
2007-03-19 05:43:43 · answer #9 · answered by TheMadLith 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well having been shot and stabbed/cut all; I would have to say that I would rather be shot. Cutting was more painful it covered more area. I would say both are deadly in the wrong hands.
2007-03-19 05:48:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋