Guns VS Swords

[on:]

Parasites Lost, this is one of my most favorite episodes. However when the planet express crew fights the worms they use guns, and the worms respond with their own guns.
So why do they fight Fry later with swords? surely it would make more sense for them to use the same guns they used to fight the planet express crew 

[Reply #1 on:]

much better to tire him out with a tedious and pointless sword fight.

plus you really want to minimize blasting the surrounding, especially around the brain. kill the host and everyone's dead.

[Reply #2 on:]

Besides which, swords just rule.

[Reply #3 on:]

duh! duels with guns are usually static.
duels with swords usually go through the entire location...in this case fry's body.

[Reply #4 on:]

Unless they got John Woo in to direct the scene.
There wouldn't be a location left!

Disclaimer: I don't like John Woo's films. At all.

[Reply #5 on:]

I was rather thinking of classic movies from the 30s or 40s, but I see your point...

[Reply #6 on:]

 

Originally posted by Gocad:
duh! duels with guns are usually static.

Have you ever seen Equilibrium? They could have had martial arts with guns 

[Reply #7 on:]

No, but have you read my previous post? 

[Reply #8 on:]

 

Originally posted by Gocad:
duh! duels with guns are usually static.
duels with swords usually go through the entire location...in this case fry's body.

Plus it's tradition. You can't have a showdown without a swordfight.

[Reply #9 on:]

The worms must have honour to engage in a duel of blades. All honourable men do.

[Reply #10 on:]

Good thing the don't subscribe to "The Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord". 

[Reply #11 on:]

They were trying to break up the action, just having two gunfights would not have been as cool.

And swords rule anyway.

[Reply #12 on:]

I think the reason for the sword fight (aside from all the 'real' reasons listed above) is simply increasing the chances of the host surviving. In a gunfight, a person doesn't normally surrender at all, and the fight only ends when somebody gets hit (killed or otherwise), leaving the worms with either no home or a lot of fixing to do.  However, with a sword fight, it is a lot simpler to defeat/disarm the other person without any physical damage, leaving a better chance of solving the problem without death and destruction. Although, with Fry being a robot, any damage done to him in either method would be not an issue, but the worms may not have known this, or figured they would be on the safe side in the fight, in case he fell or otherwise damaged his body.  Also, it's a lot easer to control collateral damage in a sword fight than in an all-out gunfight, which is a major advantage (the deciding one, I would think). Plus, it's cool.

note: this is an expansion/elaboration on what feralHuman said earlier.  Gotta give credit where credit is due.

[Reply #13 on:]

I just thought the thing was spontanius.

[Reply #14 on:]

Yeah I agree with Nurdbot, they needed to attack Fry quickly and they had swords on hand.

[Reply #15 on:]

Ditto. That's all I need to say.

[Reply #16 on:]

i like parrasites lost i like the sword fight with fry and the worm king

[Reply #17 on:]

This seems like a ritualized fight for power. Perhaps in such a fight, the worms believe blades carry more honor than bullets/blasts/whatever.
Also, the fact that the worm King had a sword at his side carries a great deal of weight.

[Reply #18 on:]

Plus sword fights are so much cooler than firefights!
(see The Last Samurai for proof)
I don't think I agree with the ritualized thing but he had the sword at his side and it was obviously easier!
Also shooting guns inside Fry's brain was probably not the best idea!
Plus where did Leela get that Axe from?

[Reply #19 on:]

A Wizard.

[Reply #20 on:]

Because sword to sword combat is more epic, you actually can see the whites of a persons eyes when they kill someone, its not like that with guns

[Reply #21 on:]

It's easy they ran out of bullets earlier.

[Reply #22 on:]

 

Originally posted by scooty puff snr:
It's easy they ran out of bullets earlier.

That's so simple, so straightforward, so sensible!
It's brilliant!

No wonder I didn't think of it...   

[Reply #23 on:]

 

Originally posted by Powarun:
Because sword to sword combat is more epic, you actually can see the whites of a persons eyes when they kill someone, its not like that with guns

bah, just mount a 10x scope on your gun... 

[Reply #24 on:]

Jeff Cooper wrote:

 

The de-glamorizer of war is distance.  There is nothing heroic about being blown up by something fired from out of sight, but excitement builds as the range closes.  When you finally confront your enemy face-to-face you truly "see the elephant," and that is when the pistol comes into its own.

Cooper is well known as one of the top pistol instructors in the country and, given our so-called 'gun-culture,' probably the world.  It is interesting that high praise of sidearms comes from a man who, like all Marines, considers himself a rifleman first.  But given the man's experience spanning three wars (four if you count the unspoken WWIII Cooper describes), one has to consider that what he knows about seeing the elephant is more than enough to fill the volumes he has written.

Early in the book To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth Cooper describes the rifle as the "queen of weapons."  He goes on to list the rifle's advantages (range, accuracy, power) and disadvantages (requisite discipline, length of proper training, importance of marksmanship in society).  He even mentions (remember this book was written in 1988) how the victorious struggle between the brave Afghans against the Communist invaders was largely because the mountain-dwelling Afghans prize marksmanship and are proud of their--undoubtedly U.S.-made--rifles.

Cooper, however, greatly dislikes the current state of combat small arms which he calls "battle carbines."  Underpowered and almost always automatic, they are the children of the theory "if you can't shoot well, shoot a lot."  This is pretty much the same treatment Cooper gives the machine pistol (submachine gun).

Cooper never addresses the "king of weapons," but I'm sure I'd be safe guessing that it is the sword.  The sword, like the pistol, is worn rather than carried.  Unlike the pistol, however, it is as much an offensive weapon as it is defensive.  In terms of pre-firearm weaponry, the sword cannot match the range of  the arrow or pike, but its versatility and general deadliness generally outweigh those drawbacks.

So, if I were the mayor of Colon, what weapon would I choose?  While the sword has a long history as a symbol of regality and power, I think I would choose a major-caliber pistol for myself and arm my general army with a similarly-major, semi-auto rifle (think M1 Garand).  Of course, my minions are worms and might not be the brightest invertebrates in the Universe (the real one, not Fry), so maybe I'd have to give in to their stupidity, take back the real rifles, and issue them M-16s or the 31st century's equivalent.  I'd also have to consider the delicate nature of structures of the brain.  While hitting the kill zone with a single shot shouldn't be a problem for rifleworms, the general enlisted worm might not be so capable.  This would create the risk of wayward shots damaging parts of the brain.  Naturally, allowing swords into the brain area was equally stupid.  Any sort of weapon could potentially damage the brain.  Even LTL weapons like tasers could disrupt electrical signals, 12ga beanbag rounds could be devistating at extremely close range, and chemical agents could inflame and injure neural tissue.  Ideally, I would have set up a series of secure, weapon-holding checkpoints leading to one, and only one, entrance guarded by Sicilian Mafia worms with slapjacks and blunt lead pipes.

Yes this has been a DrT post that wasn't in Offtopic.

[Reply #25 on:]

@ Dr Thunder88
 Wow! That was way more detail on the subject than I thought reasoably possible!
Still, very well reasoned.

[Reply #26 on:]

Meh.  You don't bring a gun to a swordfight.  Simple as that.

[Reply #27 on:]

It's dramatic?

Also DT as always knows his shi stuff.  His explanation was as enjoyable as it was informative to read.

[Reply #28 on:]

Interestingly enough, soon after I posted that micro-thesis I was watching "A Tale of Two Santas" on my newly acquired DVDs when I noticed the snowman holding a gun is actually holding a very well drawn M1 Garand.  Sure it looks like it has the upper handguard of an M1A/M14, but it's still pretty good looking.

Wait, that wasn't interesting at all...

[Reply #29 on:]

   

Originally posted by DrThunder88:
Interestingly enough, soon after I posted that micro-thesis I was watching "A Tale of Two Santas" on my newly acquired DVDs when I noticed the snowman holding a gun is actually holding a very well drawn M1 Garand.  Sure it looks like it has the upper handguard of an M1A/M14, but it's still pretty good looking.

Indeed, it's a Garand. Just some parts have the wrong color...

   

Originally posted by DrThunder88:
Wait, that wasn't interesting at all...

True, but a post is a post...     

[Reply #30 on:]

It may not have been interesting, but it sure was imformative!

Maybe they have some WWII buffs on the staff.

[Reply #31 on:]

they sure have...

 : points at "Roswell that ends well":