Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

smugetsu wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
The shield or the lasgun? I vote lasgun, since we already have a good technology base to work with on those.

smugetsu wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Arguing about this is great mental exercise though, both sides have lots of evidence and good logic. There's something I just love about arguements where boths sides are right.

I do like our discussion...I think both sides have managed to keep it civil, and that's an essential part of good discussion. If you can't do that, you'll never get anywhere with anybody. I may not agree with you, but I respect you, and that's the first step. Hopefully the feeling is mutual...

SwordMaster wrote:

smugetsu wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
The shield or the lasgun? I vote lasgun, since we already have a good technology base to work with on those.

I think both are far away from actual science of today, the lasgun shoots arcs no beams, so really there is nothing close to this and the shield is one of the few things in Frank's universe that did not have some solid science behind it. I have looked into it and there is very litle detail of how shields worked. One of the only explainations in the DE was fairly flimsy too. Something about ionized particals, it was techno babble.

But from a timeline prespective, if I had a billion dollars to invest in one or the other, the shield seems to have far more potentail since it is defensive and we have enough ways to kill each other now with projectiles and explosives. A lasgun only has the advantage of needing energy instead of ammunition. And we have quite a bit of ammo stored up, enough to kill everyone 100times over, without a nuke.

SwordMaster wrote:This was not me.

But I would have done the same thing, I do not keep my firearms in my home, they reside up north at the cottage. Had this guy been in my cottage garage, I would have shot his face off. But since I only have my katana here in the city, the result would have been idenctical. The reason for 2 cuts if not obvious is that you do not learn to injure a man, you learn to kill him in proper sword training ala book of 5 rings.

So the first cut would have been through the arm to drop the hand, the second across the chest for the kill blow. A swordsmen would never simply cut once, you are trained in various cominations of cuts. Even an unarmed man would basicly be no different then a man armed with a sword. The training shows no difference between armed and unarmed. Mainly because there really was no such thing as unarmed in ancient Japan. But in toay's world as an earlier poster pointed out, it is violent, and fairly unknown. It goes without saying I think this person did nothing wrong.

Thanks for the mention FZ, maybe I should come back now that summers over and Canada is about to get really cold, I have a lot more time on my hands. Hey Chig, burry the katana?

SwordMaster wrote:Hey Chig, burry the katana?

SwordMaster wrote:This was not me.

The reason for 2 cuts if not obvious is that you do not learn to injure a man, you learn to kill him in proper sword training ala book of 5 rings.

So the first cut would have been through the arm to drop the hand, the second across the chest for the kill blow. A swordsmen would never simply cut once, you are trained in various cominations of cuts.

SadisticCynic wrote:Nice to see you back SwordMaster.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Good to see you back man.


And did I miss something gigantic - arcs? I thought lasguns were literally just lasers.

SwordMaster wrote:They are lasers, but in HoD, Frank writes about arcs, not beams. All laser tech we have is in beam form. Laser beams as we know them have limited range in terms of heat and output over a distance. An arced laser in theory would be most of a plasma based laser would discharge an arc of energy, allowing it to projectile over a long distance with high heat and power.

SandRider wrote:for another cookie, tell me how England ended up gun-free ....

Freakzilla wrote:Really? Explain this: 25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'. Crime rate plummeted after law required firearms for residents

As the nation debates whether more guns or fewer can prevent tragedies like the Virginia Tech Massacre, a notable anniversary passed last month in a Georgia town that witnessed a dramatic plunge in crime and violence after mandating residents to own firearms.

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of "Wild West" showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city's crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township's crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted.

In a column titled "Gun Town USA," Art Buchwald suggested Kennesaw would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts. The Washington Post mocked Kennesaw as "the brave little city … soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world." Phil Donahue invited the mayor on his show.

Reuters, the European news service, today revisited the Kennesaw controversy following the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: "When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area." Kennesaw is just north of Atlanta.

The Reuters story went on to report: "Since the Virginia Tech shootings, some conservative U.S. talk show hosts have rejected attempts to link the massacre to the availability of guns, arguing that had students been allowed to carry weapons on campus someone might have been able to shoot the killer."

Virginia Tech, like many of the nation's schools and college campuses, is a so-called "gun-free zone," which Second Amendment supporters say invites gun violence – especially from disturbed individuals seeking to kill as many victims as possible.

Cho Seung-Hui murdered 32 and wounded another 15 before turning his gun on himself.

SwordMaster wrote:Teg - What version of 5 rings have you read? I guess I will have to start quoting it again. And not even exclusive to that book, kendo is not a sport. It is an art of killing. That is all it is. There is no points, there is no fencing. You aim to kill your opponent and that is your only aim. What version did you read? The purpose of a warrior is what? To kill. That is it. Nothing more or less. You try and cut down your opponent. Cut Down = Kill with no mercy.

Nice one Chig, glad we are back on track

SwordMaster wrote:great convo. did FZ ever set up the ignore post feature?

Laser beam and Laser arc are indeed different tech. Il let chigjew explain the details since he is such a master of words

chanilover wrote: Do you think the experience would be the same in an urban area with high levels of unemployment, drug addiction, broken homes, gang culture and the other causes of violent crime?

chanilover wrote:

SandRider wrote:for another cookie, tell me how England ended up gun-free ....

We're not gun-free, the gun control laws are just a lot tighter in most of the UK than in the US. The right to bear arms used to be part of English common law, and it was pretty common for people in urban areas to carry guns right up to the beginning of the 20th century. Restrictions were imposed throughout the 20th century on the right to own guns, and now for the majority of people in the UK gun ownership is a non-issue. Gun-ownership is usually associated with hunting in the countryside.

Northern Ireland is a bit different from the rest of the UK. Gun-ownership is more common there, and it's the only part of the UK where self-defence is accepted as a valid reason for issuing a gun licence.

SandRider wrote:

chanilover wrote:

SandRider wrote:for another cookie, tell me how England ended up gun-free ....

We're not gun-free, the gun control laws are just a lot tighter in most of the UK than in the US. The right to bear arms used to be part of English common law, and it was pretty common for people in urban areas to carry guns right up to the beginning of the 20th century. Restrictions were imposed throughout the 20th century on the right to own guns, and now for the majority of people in the UK gun ownership is a non-issue. Gun-ownership is usually associated with hunting in the countryside.

Northern Ireland is a bit different from the rest of the UK. Gun-ownership is more common there, and it's the only part of the UK where self-defence is accepted as a valid reason for issuing a gun licence.

no cookie.

and you fail your citizenship test.

(not saying you're not partially correct, but there was a specific event ...)