03-22-2011, 05:00 PM | #41 (permalink) |
Banned
Location: The Cosmos
|
ya dude old testament is keepin it real, yanaw what I mean g funk? they were all crazy with the violence up in the hizhouse.
That said, if its true, I'll come for while you sleep SF and gain your courage "I am the one hiding under your bed Teeth ground sharp and eyes glowing red "I am the one hiding under your stairs Fingers like snakes and spiders in my hair Round that corner, man hiding in the trash can Something's waiting now to pounce, and how you'll... "Scream! This is Halloween Red 'n' black, slimy green "Aren't you scared? ''Well, that's just fine Say it once, say it twice Take a chance and roll the dice Ride with the moon in the dead of night ''Everybody scream, everybody scream "I am the clown with the tear-away face Here in a flash and gone without a trace "I am the "who" when you call, "Who's there?" I am the wind blowing through your hair "I am the shadow on the moon at night Filling your dreams to the brim with fright" disclaimer not really, don't even know were he lives. Last edited by Zeraph; 03-22-2011 at 05:05 PM.. |
03-22-2011, 11:57 PM | #42 (permalink) |
follower of the child's crusade?
|
Actually, what I posted isnt from the bible, but the gospel of Thomas.
I wasnt claiming you should pay attention to it on religious grounds, but on human grounds. _ I think for my satisfaction all of the *technical* questions in this thread have already been answered. Whatever high tech guns people think they would want, witin a short period of time the lower technology level of the weapon the better if all of society has broken down. (ie, on day one driving around in a tank would be better than having a machine gun, but how could you maintain a tank? better stikc to the machine gun, but theyre fiddly things, a Glock 19 would be easier to clean and keep in working order, etc...) I think it is valid, and meaningful, to ask ourselves why - if a universal war of some kind as killed 90% of humanity, would the first thoughts we who survive have to be grab the best remaining means of destruction to finish the job? You would say I guess "I would much rather live in peace, but you must be realistic, other people would try to kill me and I must defend myself". Insofar as that argument is correct, or would be proven correct, it is really an awful tragedy, isnt it? _ I'll happily stick with my fishing rod, my spear, and my fishing knife.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas |
03-23-2011, 04:58 AM | #43 (permalink) |
Asshole
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
I've been thinking about your comments, Strange Famous, and I think you're on to something interesting. I'm not sure that it fits within the rules of Tilted Weaponry, but it's interesting.
I think that it would depend on the culture. Look at Japan and Indonesia - after huge natural disasters, there were no reports of looting, vigilantes, etcs. The lights go out in New York City, and it's the end of the world. Same with New Orleans. I'd have to say that it's situational - different cultures are going to respond to different threats differently. If the world ends with a lot of snow, I think there would be less violence since survivors would need to focus more on warmth and food than anything else. Take the need for warmth out of the equation, and that leaves energy to be spent on fighting whatever remaining neighbors there are. Of course a culture that focuses more on the group than the individual would have different results - at least in my mind. We'll have to see where this goes, and this may get split into a separate thread elsewhere.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo |
03-23-2011, 06:18 AM | #44 (permalink) |
Tilted
Location: Sunny South Florida
|
IMHO - There are two "best" post apocalyptic weapons.
1. Ranged : 12g shotgun. My preference is a Mossberg 500 but that's just me. Assuming we are talking real world and not mutant / zombie / monster, stealth is not going to be your concern, defense is. - Shotties will stop a man or beast with one shot, spread out enough to hit 2 or 3 attackers at once, and with the right ammo have the range to hunt accurately up to 100 yards. - The sight of a shotgun will dissuade half of the population, the sound of a racking shell will get rid of the other half. - Shotties are meant to be rugged, easy to fix and require a minimum of maintenance. They just work. - Shotgun shells are readily accessible, inexpensive, and come in a huge variety tailored to your immediate need. - You'll find shells in every rural farmhouse you stop to raid on your way up to the mountains. 2. Melee : A 3 - 4 foot prybar / crowbar is your best friend. - It can open locked doors, windows, etc, whether to save someone or to scavenge or to open a can of beans. - It can block and potentially break the sword or machete of anyone silly enough to still be carrying one if they aren't a trained swordsman. - It never needs sharpening, polishing, etc. - It can be used to bludgeon, and will crush / break any armor or defenses between it and your target. - If need be it can be used as a stabbing / puncture tool, and while it may not have the finesse of an épée, it will get the job done. |
03-23-2011, 09:25 AM | #45 (permalink) |
Banned
Location: The Cosmos
|
But naw, seriously. I'd just have my sword. I own guns, but in the case of the end of the world, I would want to make sure I die honorably or protecting women and children. Course you'd be surprised at how much I can do with just a sword, even if vs gunmen.
That is, honorably, dieing is the only thing I'd have left in my control. So I'd go out how I want to. I wouldn't play the stupid wargames. |
Tags |
postapocalyptic, weapon |
|
|