Sweden sword attack: Two dead after masked attacker strikes

[Hamish McPanji]

Not so easy if the weapon fired projectiles. Now i know you can dodge bullets like a champ....but noone else can.

And people don't run if they see someone wielding a gun?

See, I answered your question already.

The think with a sword is.....you have to be within striking distance. Not really required for a gun. Guns allow you to shoot from a distance. Common knowledge that. As a gun advocate though you would be familiar with these devices

 

[Wasabee!]

no allahu akbars were heard

Out thanking the lord that he didn't have a gun. Otherwise this would have been a lot worse

It was spoderman. Dolan y u do dis?

 

[supersunbird]

See, I answered your question already.

The think with a sword is.....you have to be within striking distance. Not really required for a gun. Guns allow you to shoot from a distance. Common knowledge that. As a gun advocate though you would be familiar with these devices

But swords don't run out of ammo...

 

[Cray]

But swords don't run out of ammo...

You should tell that to every army in the world that for some reason think that soldiers with guns are better than soldiers with swords.

 

[Alan]

Well, what is the likelihood of being shot in Norway as opposed to the US? It's not that hard to figure this out, you know

Let me ask you, how many people would this guy have been able to kill if he had a gun?

for mass shooting its pretty high considering population ratios. The US has 60 times the population of Norway so the equivalent casualties for the US would be 4600+ people.

Plenty since nobody could defend themselves. Do you know if he attempted to get a gun?

 

[Hamish McPanji]

You should tell that to every army in the world that for some reason think that soldiers with guns are better than soldiers with swords.

Is it just me, or are the arguments/statements being made on this thread really gone a bit silly.