** I think the logic goes that in sword-fighting, you are, in a way, getting up-close and personal with the person who you may kill or who may kill you; there's a directness to the action of fighting and killing them, and you are theoretically exposing yourself to as much danger as you are placing the other person in, since you can't use a sword at a distance; even if you sneak up behind them, they can possibly hear you, counter your attack and successfully kill you instead. There's also an immediacy to killing them; you'll get their blood over your hands and sword, you can look them in the eye, even converse with them. There's a sort of bonding happening, which can if you're so inclined lend the process a sort of romantic nobility (in as much as stabbing someone with a sharpened bit of metal can be said to have any); if you have to kill someone, you are at least directly killing in person. With a gun, however, you can avoid all this; you can shoot someone from a distance, hidden in the shadows without them even being aware of your existence, and you can keep your hands clean. It's a bit more distant, a bit more impersonal. Again, if you're so inclined, it's not hard to view this as a 'cheat' of sorts.

to:

** I think the logic goes that in sword-fighting, you are, in a way, getting up-close and personal with the person who you may kill or who may kill you; there's a directness to the action of fighting and killing them, and you are theoretically exposing yourself to as much danger as you are placing the other person in, since you can't use a sword at a distance; even if you sneak up behind them, they can possibly hear you, counter your attack and successfully kill you instead. There's also an immediacy to killing them; you'll get their blood over your hands and sword, you can look them in the eye, even converse with them. There's a sort of bonding happening, which can if you're so inclined lend the process a sort of romantic nobility (in as much as stabbing someone with a sharpened bit of metal can be said to have any). At the very least, if you have to kill someone, you are at least directly killing them in person; there's a certain honor there. With a gun, however, you can avoid all this; you can shoot someone from a distance, hidden in the shadows without them even being aware of your existence, and you can keep your hands clean. It's a bit more distant, a bit more impersonal, a bit more cold. Again, if you're so inclined, it's not hard to view this as a cowardly 'cheat' of sorts, since you're keeping yourself out of the same danger you're inflicting on your victim. Of course, now that both sides are more likely to have guns than swords (or one side with a gun and the other with a sword), this is less likely to apply, but romantic views of the world can be hard to shake.

9th Nov '11 8:55:34 PM DoctorNemesis

Send DoctorNemesis a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 11 (click to see context) :

Deleted line(s) 14 (click to see context) :

26th Oct '11 4:47:20 PM Citizen

Send Citizen a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:

to:

3rd Sep '11 6:25:11 AM rottenvenetic

Send rottenvenetic a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 7 (click to see context) :

Added line(s) 12 (click to see context) :