New respect for crossbows

Status
Not open for further replies.
8XXX{0}====> said:
But, of course, this is in a country where, if i remember correctly, any lawbreaking with a firearm involved grants an automatic life sentance, no questions asked, speedy trial, no parole.

You could not be more wrong. In Switzerland there is no such thing as an "automatic life sentence", and especially not without parole. And speedy trial? I work at court, there is no such thing for capital crimes either. (And just breaking the law with a gun is not a capital crime in itself.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mercule said:


Henry, I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at here. It _sounds_ like you're saying that these other weapons should be regulated or that regulation would have changed what happened. If regulation was the problem, we'd hear a lot more sword and crossbow rampages and a lot fewer gun rampages.

Sword & machete rampages are quite common in the UK. Samurai swords are a particular favourite amongst the spree-killing fraternity. A crossbow is a poor weapon for a rampage! Fortunately blade-rampagers tend to only be able to kill 1 or 2 people.
 

I'd always thought the axe would be the weapon of choice for the unhinged who want to go on a rampage, but then again Im not completly crazy in that sense. :D

Machette,
Have to buy it at a disposals store and like theres enough woodland in most citys that need hacking though so you'll get raised eybrows, or maybe not. They also tend to be slightly unwieldy against anything but inanimate objects, being a heavy one handed weapon often in the hands of someone who probably spent their life molesting nothing more than a salad.

Sword,
Definatly a sign of the bat-**** crazy madman, but most people dont know how to use one well and they do take quite a lot of skill to swing around without maiming yourself.
But, your a crazy madman so you dont care really.
Walking around with one tends to pick you out pretty early too so the cops have something easy to aim at.

Axe,
Lets face it, its big, its sharp and it cuts through tree's, doors, people, dogs and anything else not behind an inch of steel. You can get an axe anywhere, people dont even think about some guy going into a hardware store and buying an axe, heck theres probably one under the house if you think the drooling, swearing at lamp posts might give you away on the way to the store.

People take someone seriously if you are swinging an axe-
A: its easy to hit with
B: you'll die if it hits you
C: Redrum


This is probably very politically incorrect but people have been swinging axes at each other only slightly longer than clubs. I guess if you really wanted to make a name for yourself on the news, use a cheesegrater.
People will remember the guy that tore up a shopping mall with a cheesegrater, at least until next week when someone flips out with a potato peeler in each hand :)
 

Axes are too hard to recover after a swing - one tends to tire oneself out!

In the UK the sword/machete spree killers tend to be big schizophrenic West Indians, your typical pasty white spree killer prefers guns - they take less effort and kill more people, although we haven't seen any for awhile (fingers crossed).
 

Saeviomagy said:
So we're a land of convicts...

Wait a minute, wasn't America ALSO a penal colony for a bit?

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I think sometimes nobles and rich people were sent here for displeasing the royalty. If you were a commoner or a killer of some sort you'd just get executed... Why America? Because at the time the USA was as backwoods as you could get so the people getting sent here had to leave "high society". :)

People like to joke about it, but I don't think anyone looks down on Australia because it used to be a penal colony.

After you've had the Alice Springs Chicken at the Outback Steakhouse you can't help but love Australia. Yeah, I'm aware that the Outback Steakhouse is probably as Australian as Woody Allen. :D

Anyway, I'd like to take this opportunity to say;
No One of Consequence is from Australia.
 

Bran Blackbyrd said:


I think sometimes nobles and rich people were sent here for displeasing the royalty. If you were a commoner or a killer of some sort you'd just get executed...

Naw, we sent all kinds of riff-raff to the American colonies (ever read Moll Flanders, or see the recent TV version?). We only switched to Australia after we lost the American colonies. My American wife audits the British penal system in her work, she says we clearly haven't known what to do with criminals since we lost the colonies! It's true - we used to export our criminal element, now we have no idea what to do with them.
 


MerakSpielman said:
Interesting. Is the 1st or the 8th category the most deadly? What sort of weapons are placed in the least-deadly category?

The categories are not hierarchical. IIRC, 1 are rifles and machineguns, 2 are military vehicles (tanks, 'copters, jets...), 3 are NBC suits and gas mask, etc. Don't look for a clear pattern there.
 

Angcuru said:
longbows are more accurate and have better range, and are deadly weapons at ANY range. crossbows are REALLY deadly, but only at close range. The average crossbow back in the day was only accurate up to a few dozen yards. After that you're shooting blind.
I don't know what period you're refering to, but by the 15th century European crossbows were more accurate and had considerably better range than longbows according to Sir Ralph Payne-Gallway's seminal book and subsequent research. In fact, the only advantage that longbows have is a greater shooting rate (about 6 times that of crossbows). In every other respect (range, accuracy, ease of use) the crossbow is superior. The reason that longbows were favoured by the English in the 14th & 15th centuries is that a large number of longbowmen could rain arrows down on their opponents at long range. However, this was not an accurate method of shooting. It only worked in the field when there were lots of longbowmen and the enemy (i.e. the French) were relatively close together. In other circumstances, the crossbow was considered advantageous.

With regards to shooting two opponents with one crossbow bolt, there's an account (15th c. Italian IIRC) of a bolt having gone right through a horse and into the leg of the horse's rider on the other side, pinning the rider to his horse.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top