It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Carnage at German church service

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Azza
I guarantee, without reservation, that a sword is more deadly than a rifle or a shotgun or a pistol or a tank. All the above work on moving parts, and they use ammunition.

A sword does not.

In the hands of a skilled person, a sword can go on killing all day long, day after day, week after week.

Granted, more people can perhaps get away, but it all depends on the level of skill and tactics present. I've been shot at, had guns pointed at me, and I'm telling you now, there's nothing I'd rather run from than a skilled warrior holding a sword - if I aint got one.




posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   
one downside with a sword is that it does not have range. Often if you can run faster then the swords man you can survive... you won't have much luck doing that against a person with a gun.

As far as the ammunition comparison I think that is a rather moot point when I can go to the nearby gun shop and buy as much ammo as I want. It might ahve been differant 200 years ago. But not today. Guns are much more efficiant at killing then a sword is.

Tho personally i would be more scare of the person with a gun then a one with the sword. I at least know how to defend myself against a sword fighter, since I have learned how to use one myself



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Azza
I guarantee, without reservation, that a sword is more deadly than a rifle or a shotgun or a pistol or a tank. All the above work on moving parts, and they use ammunition.

A sword does not.

In the hands of a skilled person, a sword can go on killing all day long, day after day, week after week.

Granted, more people can perhaps get away, but it all depends on the level of skill and tactics present. I've been shot at, had guns pointed at me, and I'm telling you now, there's nothing I'd rather run from than a skilled warrior holding a sword - if I aint got one.


i got to agree on this. i know sword fighting i have been in big battles where swords are primarily used, i have been in one on one contests.(and let me tell you i'm only mediocre at it lol). as archaic as a sword is it is quite deadly. just for an example of how effective this "old" tech is. i was once in a field battle (one of my first) where haveing somwhere over 2000 participants involved to my knowledge. i was quite anoyed at how soon i had gotten killed. walking off the field i turned and looked back there wasn't even 40 people left. a freind timed the whole battle to be over in under 15 minutes.

now this was unarmed targets no armer no shields not even a sword to block with. i would think i could take out at least 20 people a minute. i might add that that is a very conservitive estimate which includes haveing to move from person to person.within a few seconds useing a nice sharp sword like a kattana i could easily remove multiple limbs from a person. i can likely hit someone 2 times a second. it realy isn't that hard and i'm not an expert. just watch an old swashbuckling movie , those guys are slow. in all honesty i hate trying to keep myself at such a slow speed in practice it is harder to do it, and you lack power. add rage into the mix and you realy don't want to be there. i can vividly picture how this thin may have looked to those there i am sure there will be many nightmares from it.

yeah a gun is simple but they have a habbit of jamming. you need skill to aim it to some extent. not to mention recoil controll. all you have to do with a sword is swing it if you hit it's gonna hurt. if you have any idea how to use it you can sever an arm in one stroke with a sharp blade. not to mention that with adrenalin kicking in you would be leathal and possibly out of controll with a sword this makes you better with a gun you'd most likely miss.

i personaly think that the woman killed was his target. i imagine that the 3 injured tried to stop the guy or just got in his way. bad idea if you don't know how to fight and have no weapon or shield best bet is to run away. i would personaly like to hear about the exact injuries and witness statements. i would hazzard a guess tht he killed his target and then ran hacking anyone in his way. he could certainly done a lot more if he had stayed arround.

i realy wonder what the cause was for this murder. killing by sword sounds rather personel since he aparently only killed one person. and why in such a public place as a church. keep in mind that just like with guns, swords don't kill people use swords to kill. i certainly will not be turning my swords in anytime soon.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azza

WTF?! If he'd had a gun he'd have Killed a HELL OF A LOT MORE, that is the most absurd "logic" I've heard all day, think for a second before you post.


Good job of completely missing my point.
If a person has the intention of going into a church and harming whoever they can, they will use whatever is at their disposal to carry out the attack.

I was just saying that this shows that banning a certain type of weapon isn't going to stop needless slaughter if that person is intent on carrying out violence against others. Whenever something like this happens it is usually with a gun, and certain people think that if the general public didn't have access to them, it wouldn't have happened. IMHO, this proves that "absurd 'logic'" wrong.

A weapon is a tool, that when put in the hands of a PERSON, only does what THAT PERSON wants it to do. If I'm not mistaken, it is very difficult to get a gun permit in Germany, so in effect they are banned. Maybe our German friends can enlighten us on that.

BTW, how is a limb being severed by a Samurai sword any less lethal than being shot in said limb?



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Any word on the type of sword used?...


According to one news outlet over here, he used a Katana.

Blobber



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Untermenschen Rebell

BTW, how is a limb being severed by a Samurai sword any less lethal than being shot in said limb?


actualy you would have a better chance at surviveing a gunsot limb compared to a severed limb. just think of that nice arterial flow , at least with a gunshot you may not get hit in the artery.
also much easyer to fix a gunshot then to reatach a limb. if one does survive.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Photo: AP/Scanpix

A 43 year old woman was killed, 3 is in serious condition.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Uhm, perhaps I am sleepy or something (it's quite late over here) but using the term "carnage" in the subject to depict 1 killed and 3 wounded (which is sad of course) is I think sensationalism, or at best an exageration.

www.dictionary.com
Carnage:
1-Massive slaughter, as in war; a massacre
2-Corpses, especially of those killed in battle.

With all respect, but it's like saying Colombine was a genocide.


Blobber


[edit on 3-4-2005 by Blobber]



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Originally this story was described as a massacre, with limbs lying about, it sounded quite bad. Now it appears to have been limited in scope.

I do think there was an element of sensationalist journalism, but reports were coming out early, as it was happening, and very little was known at the time.

You can see in that photo above, the photographers were on the scene before the suspect was apprehended.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Wyrdeone,

Ah ok, that explains a lot.

Blobber



posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   
still this is a shocking story and very sick,
i feel sorry for the victims




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join