Most of what you are saying doesn't make sense at all. If an untrained person fires a gun they won't know how to handle the recoil of it, they probably won't know how to reload it, and it is more than likely that they'll end up shooting themselves in the foot. But this doesn't mean they don't have the ability to kill. When a person fires a gun it is an action, and by the laws of physics there must be a reaction.Ordinaryundone said:I love how people keep saying "Anyone can pick up a gun and kill someone, it takes time to master a melee weapon!" Do you really think every peasant they gave a spear to and said "charge that formation" was freaking Lu Bu? Swords (and most melee weapons) were mostly used by people who only understood one aspect of their function: Stick them with the pointy end. There was no finesse, no beauty. You'd see more martial elegance in a butcher's shop. Meanwhile, when is the last time you've seen someone untrained in a firearm hit the broadside of a barn? Check it out on youtube, some of the videos they have of beginners firing guns are hilarious. I'd dare say a newbie would have an easier time killing someone with a sword simply because its more instinctual. A gun requires some knowledge of its mechanisms and workings to even use it. A sword....well, its appearance sort of explains itself.
I.e: bullet is fired out of the gun(action) wounds/kills somebody (reaction). When the deed is done, the deed is done; it doesn't matter if the person blew their hand off in the process because they still fired the gun and every functional person has the ability to fire a loaded gun. This leads on to my next point.
The reason I have listed above is enough for guns to be considered inelegant and so I shall list an explanation to why I mentioned it.
Criminals and gang members alike are notorious for carrying a concealed weapon: either a gun or a knife and in the hands of a criminal these are not considered elegant at all as for what they are: a tool to get the job done.
The average criminal does not have any expertise in handling weapons but this isn't a problem for them as like I mentioned earlier: anyone can fire a small arms loaded gun. A concealed weapon would usually be something like a Glock or submachine-gun at most powerful as it is concealable and is easy to use. But if we go up the ladder a little we can find the M14 sniper rifle/automatic. This gun takes much more skill to use than a Glock or a submachine-gun where it is literally point the gun at the thing you want to be full of holes and you pull the trigger. This gun is different: it requires training and expertise to be operated and is a much more powerful gun. But it is still just a gun: a weapon which in essence the concept is just as basic as a handgun. A small time criminal would not own this gun as it is far too hard to use and hard to conceal. But an American homeowner might as if they had the license it would be perfected legal for them to own that gun.
I don't know what type of blade you people are thinking of here, but when most people think elegant blade, they think Katana. A Katana is the definitive Samurai sword used for centuries among the highest ranking warriors the Japanese could offer. People spent lifetimes trying to perfect the art of swordfighting centuries ago.
--Actually, I've just realized something massively important and so I'll cut to my conclusion quickly:
The reason people think guns are so inelegant is because when countries were invaded centuries ago the natives didn't have guns while the invaded did as they come from a more technologically advanced society and the invaders slaughtered thousands upon thousands of natives with their 'guns' and all the natives could do was pray that they would outlive the day. With this particular war I am referring to when the Red Indian's land was stolen from they are were nearly wiped out to extinction.
Wars are horrific and guns just make them more so. Guns are plainly used for evil than good things, and that is why I think they are considered inelegant.