Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenchu
That is not what I meant. I agree that useing anything as a weapon can be a good skill. I meant training a thing that is designed for a purpose other than killing in an extreme manner - that seems dumb to me.
I think these Japanese weapons are just taught now as part of a tradition. The nunchaku was never considered superior to the katana. The only reason it was practiced was because not everyone could have a katana. But now days you can (if you have money). Many countries allow guns, also. There are knives everywhere, too. Why train to use a farming tool? That is just a tradition. Being traditional is fair enough if your into that, but when it comes to practicallity I dont see why these inferior weapons are used.
|
You have to look at it from a historical prospective too.
Something I think you might be forgetting is that. ONLY (and I can't stress this enough) the Samurai, where actually allowed to use the sword.
A peasent cought using a Katana was put to death. Probably his entire family too. So how do you defend yourself from violent Samurai (not all samurai where noble, in fact some where outright cruel) and not get yourself and your family killed for using "noble" weapons?
For example,
Nunchaku where originally tools for crushing beans and wheat. Millers tools.
The Bo Staff or quarterstaff has a whole range of non martial uses. Carrying water pails, walking sticks, stuff like that.
Kama where originally scythes used to harvest rice and grain.
Kunai where originally gardening tools, used to loosen soil in small gardens.
And that's a small handfull. But they are all things that can kill someone if used properly. They are not inferior weapons. They are results of human innovation. Any weapon or style has its flaws. But you seem to want to say that weapons for weapons sake are better. But honestly what good is a sword when you have nothing to kill?