Why isn't a gun considered an elegant weapon?

[L9OBL]

It's because as you have said they DEMAND respect. They are deadly just by them selves able to go off if dropped or in my friends case looked at funny. They are just a piece of soulless machinery able to do damage no matter the handler, quality of the gun or state it is in. Blades on the other hand have souls and personalities in many cases. They don't demand their respect but earn it. Blademanship is a work of art what you put into it you get out. I'm sure plenty of you have heard of the whole swords and energy bit where and old tattered sword that a swordsman pours all of his energy into will hold up and beat a brand new sword that was just picked up (and both swordsmen are of equal skill and whatnot). I know I'm just blabbing on and most of you think I'm nuts or something and to be honest I'm not doing the greatest at expressing myself but I guess what I'm saying is blades require a certain finesse guns. Also guns are very impersonal "bang bang he's dead" that's all it amounts to you feel nothing. With a blade on the other hand you feel every cut and slice run through you as if you were doing it with an actual part of your body. You feel them die , you breathe their last breath and what's left of them leaves through you. I know it's very morbid and whatnot and no I haven't killed any one or hurt any one with a knife (well with the exception of the time I was jumped but that's self defence). I do a lot of hunting and trapping so I've taken an animals life with both kinds of weapons and a gun is very impersonal, very numb if I might say.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

They aren't as pretty as swords. Simple as that.

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

What's this about "it takes years of training with a sword" and "Guns take no effort" garbo? Years of training? Against who? The samurai are dead. No one's really around to turn one on one sword play into the fight of the century. It'll take just as much effort to flail a sharp object at someone as it will to point and shoot. Maybe you're slightly inconvenienced having to walk up to someone to hit them. The only elegant weapons are the ones that can persuade without violence.
For example:

 

[jumjalalabash]

Its not elegant because anyone can pick up a gun, unload it at someone's general direction, and kill them. Something like a sword takes a lot more skill and practice to actually use.

Once again, it really doesn't. Any idiot could pick up a sword and stab you with no prior training whatsoever.

You pick up a sword and try to use it without the body or skill training all you are going to do is dislocate your shoulder and cut off your foot. Not to mention its a lot easier to get away from a sword then a gun.

 

[pigmypython]

Loud, noisy, and blunt...some skill is needed but if you give a child an AK-47 he can kill just as easily as a trained soldier (at least at short range) so this makes it inelegant. Gun and finesse do not go well together

 

[rabidmidget]

I dunno, revolvers are still pretty elegant.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Okay, time for a little rant,

GUNS ARE NOT FUCKING MAGIC DEATH MACHINES. Its kind of annoying that everyone thinks that just because I don't have to run up to my opponent like an idiot doesn't mean that its just a magic killing machine. If I handed everyone who said that a rifle and told them to hit a man sized target at 50m, I doubt half could, much less the 100m and 200m expected of the modern rifleman, and thats the low ball number. The fact is that rifles are putting half centimeter bits of metal accurately hundreds of meters away. Less than a inch of change of the barrel could mean hit or miss, life or death. Swords are elegant no doubt, but just because teaching a swordsman is less efficient than a rifleman, doesn't mean they are any better.

 

[Littlee300]

In L.A. Noir, there's a part in the game where your partner makes a comment about Italians being cowards because they use switchblades. He says "A real man fights with his fists or a gun." Didn't really understand how that makes sense.

It is that's what HE uses. It made me laugh because it seemed satirical.
When I think of a gun I don't think of

I think of a guy behind cover screaming orders.

 

[Jedoro]

I'll admit there's nothing elegant about guns; scientifically marvelous, yes, but not elegant. It's kinda cool to see a breakdown of a gun and all the moving parts inside, especially in automatics.

But elegant's not the point of a fight of any kind. "For those regarded as warriors, when engaged in combat, the vanquishing of thine enemy can be the warrior's only concern. Suppress all human emotion and compassion. Kill whoever stands in thy way, whether it be Lord God or Buddha himself. This truth lies at the heart of the art of combat." Combat ain't about looking pretty, it's about walking away, whether the other guy can or not.

 

[MegaManOfNumbers]

Yeah, nothing's more elegant than point-and-clicking someone to DEATH from a safe distance!

*rolls eyes*

 

[HalfTangible]

So this is a thought that I've been mulling around in the old noggin'. Why isn't a gun considered an elegant weapon? I've heard it said that it's because guns take the challenge out of duel or fight, that it's over too quickly and that guns make said duels unsportsmanlike but I never bought that line of thinking.
The way I see guns are sophisticated pieces of equipment, powerful, intimidating and above all else they demand respect. A gun is something you do not handle lightly no matter how much experienced you may have with one unless you have a death wish, and forgive me for being blunt but they look pretty damn cool.
Hell you can even add decals or engravements to give them that last touch of finesse. So why are they still considered inelegant weapons? Alright you've heard my opinion so what's yours?

It's mostly the noise - an explosion translates as wasteful in the human psyche.

...

What? The ones that make perfect sense have already been done

Yeah, nothing's more elegant than point-and-clicking someone to DEATH from a safe distance!

*rolls eyes*

*gasp*

Guns were the first mmo!

 

[Midnight Crossroads]

What's this about "it takes years of training with a sword" and "Guns take no effort" garbo? Years of training? Against who? The samurai are dead. No one's really around to turn one on one sword play into the fight of the century. It'll take just as much effort to flail a sharp object at someone as it will to point and shoot. Maybe you're slightly inconvenienced having to walk up to someone to hit them. The only elegant weapons are the ones that can persuade without violence.
For example:

The only right answer in the entire thread. Every great military thinker in history agreed that avoiding conflict in the first place, or causing the enemy to surrender without a fight was far better than a bloody war.

 

[Joby Baumann]

in all honesty, because they arent outdated yet,

i'd bet that the first time someone used a sword instead of a stick and rock people had the same reactions

 

[Derek Westlund]

have you ever compared the neatness the wounds from a sword or knife to the exit of a gun shot wound

sharp edge leads to clean neat wounds

blunt high speed trauma (gun shot) leads to massive messy hole and more blood every where

also melee weapons don't have anywhere near as much collateral damage

 

[Amethyst Wind]

Guns are, in a sense, blunt. They only fire straight (gravity notwithstanding) and offer limited control when compared to a weapon short-range weapon like a sword.

There's no 'flow' to a gun. Point and shoot, the efficiency is determined completely by the weapon/ammo, whereas the human element is present in non-projectile weapons.

Guns are scarily efficient killing tools, and I suppose another argument for their lack of elegance is their lack of moderation. It's far more difficult to NOT kill something you shoot with a gun rather than a non-projectile weapon.

I think the element of control is what determines the elegance here, guns just don't have enough, or (if you want to get metaphysical about it), guns have more intention-separate-from-ours than non-projectiles do.

 

[Beastialman]

I consider some guns elegant. Revolvers and muskets are very stylish.

 

[me.vicky]

Unfortunately, there is nothing elegant about an explosion. That's just the way things are.

 

[Timeenforceranubis]

First of all, all the people saying "It's just point and shoot" neglect the fact that 1: You can still do considerable damage with a sword by just flailing it around randomly, if you hit someone, and 2: Today's warriors still go through a great deal of training to familiarize themselves with their weaponry.

Guns are elegant, but the elegance is more in their use than in the weapons themselves. A group of special operators, in perfect concert, breaching a door and clearing a room out before anyone inside knows what's going on? That's elegant, I don't care what anyone says.

 

[JustJuust]

I think it's because guns haven't been around as long as swords have. In my opinion, those old guns where it took an amateur about a minute to fire and reload are elegant. I mean imagine being in a battlefield trying to put the powder in, put the paper and the lead ball. That takes skill. I guess one of the reasons why people think swords are more elegant is because you have to be physically fit to be able to master using a sword, but you don't have to be physically fit to fire a rifle. You just need to practice shooting with your rifle to be able to shoot it well, and you don't get tired form pulling the trigger all day now do you? (shoulder might hurt, but compared to a sword... not so much)

 

[CounterReproductive]

I will fight any man or woman here who wishes to bring a gun to a swordfight to prove their elegance. I will repeat that in case you missed it the first time. I will fight any man or woman who wishes to bring a GUN to a swordfight. Only a gun, no ammunition is allowed. Lets see how elegant and effective your lump of metallic moving parts is then.

A gun relies on chemical conversion from its ammunition to make it effective as anything other than a hammer or club.

Some guns can be considered as having good looks, most unfortunately do not. Then again in the days when swords were most commonly used I would suggest that they were also not seen as paticularly elegant or stylish. I would challenge anybody who has been on the receiving end of a knife/sword/gun to tell you how elegant and beautiful they are. Speaking from experience , nothing is beautiful when it is putting holes in you, and before anyone starts with the 'you must have deserved it' schtick, I was attacked.

I shoot, I hunt and I acknowledge that the firearm makes it easier to do (provided it has ammunition.) Yet I know that for me to b able to use a firearm effectively I trained three days a week 2 hours or more at a time, practising stances, reloads, leading a target, recoil control. I wont go into the practical pistol competition stuff beause that has other aspects. I still do these exercises, I still practise. Even with all the practise I still miss shots.

All weapons are tools. designed to kill, maim and injure. There is nothing elegant about any of them