Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Orkeosaurus wrote:I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:I did, but having six man boobs isn't as attractive as you might think.

Well, have you tried buying a gun? (rimshot)

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Owning a Gun" bullgak that's going on in DakkaDakka right now. Katanas are much better than them. Much, much better than them.

I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.

That is probably the dumbest waste of $20,000 dollars...ever.

Not sure I would brag about that too much.


By the way, I can shoot you with my ratty a$$ smith and wesson 9mm in the face at 40 yards with a VERY reasonable chance of being on target.

How is a Katana better?

I seem to remember this scene from "Raiders of the Lost Ark".

Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

Okay, Orkeo, I can't tell if you're being serious anymore.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

Katanas are the most deadliest thing ever and can totally cut through a tank is a flamewar we haven't had before (not that I can remember anyway).

Or bigfoot. We haven't had a big argument where people argue whether bigfoot is real. None of you believe in bigfoot because you're all sheeple that believe what the government tells you.

Katana.
Cutting 'slabs' of steel...
Copypasta?

WTF? Did *no one* watch Mythbusters ever?

Orkeosaurus wrote:Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

....or was it because....

The men with Katana's were officers? (shoot the big ones?)

OR

Someone charging at me with a frigging SWORD might get shot before the guy charging me with a simple bayonet? (by the way, the key point here is the swordfighter is getting SHOT. Rather than a sword, perhaps the japs wouldve been better served by carrying more ammo so that they wouldnt HAVE to attempt to close to HtH...you know, like the Americans were doing?)

Home defense....I'll take a pistol. Swordfighting is for Immortals and boxers named Butch.

Copypasta.

Any developments, Falconlance?

::relieved::

I guess I need to get around /b/ a little more often.

Albatross wrote:@Roze - Ah, but a crossbow won't keep you warm at night, my dear!






What a weird sentence. Lol.

LOL it could. Big o'l water bottle strapped to it would do me just right!

Roze wrote:

Albatross wrote:@Roze - Ah, but a crossbow won't keep you warm at night, my dear!

LOL it could. Big o'l water bottle strapped to it would do me just right!

Er . . .

Hot water bottle.

Deadshane1 wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

....or was it because....

The men with Katana's were officers? (shoot the big ones?)

OR

Someone charging at me with a frigging SWORD might get shot before the guy charging me with a simple bayonet? (by the way, the key point here is the swordfighter is getting SHOT. Rather than a sword, perhaps the japs wouldve been better served by carrying more ammo so that they wouldnt HAVE to attempt to close to HtH...you know, like the Americans were doing?)

Home defense....I'll take a pistol. Swordfighting is for Immortals and boxers named Butch.

i will quote cryptonomon

soldier-"always shoot the guys with the swords"

reporter-"because their officers"

soldier-"no, because they they have mother fething swords, have you ever been charged by someone with a mother fething sword, its fething scary."

A lot of Japanese swords of the inter-war period were low-quality versions made cheaply in China.

It has been established, to my shame, that Orkeo was trolling. Why are we still talking about this?

Does Falconlance have a gun yet? Or a new girlfriend?

Did you get your gun then??

Albatross, the thrust of your opinion comes across as "owning guns is unnecessary and basically barbaric and we British are above it."

Only if you can't read. As I've already said, MY opinion doesn't enter into it - my point was (and remains) that British people are NOT indoctrinated to be 'anti-gun'.

Also, the claim that you "make up your own minds" is ridiculous. You are shaped by cultural norms just like we are, the norms are just different

Cultural norms do not 'shape' a populace, it's the other way around - culture is an organic process. If you were talking about ideology, you might have a point. But I'd still be right. As guns are not part of our cultural landscape, there is no strong ideological support for ownership or control of them - hence people can make unemotional decisions about where they stand on the matter. Viewed objectively, I struggle to see how a society flooded with weapons could be a positive thing. But hey, I can keep an open mind unlike some people on here.

well, you don't actually know anything about them from personal experience but only what other people have told you

And from seeing american high-school/postal worker/Army Base gun rampages reported on the BBC with depressing regularity.

You *also* have less <insert tool here> deaths by nature of population density.

(sigh)

Less guns per capita, less gun deaths per capita. It's really not that complicated - although I think you're being wilfully obtuse. And given a choice between cameras and guns, I know which I would rather have as the dominant aspect of Britain's domestic security. Why are americans obsessed with the CCTV thing?

..and I think we're about done.

To the OP, feel free to update interested parties at to the final result or, you know, whatever.