uberevan Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I hope this thread gets popular enough to say "Hot" It'd be incredibly ironic Johnny Fisher 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatonesandwitch Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 I hope this thread gets popular enough to say "Hot" It'd be incredibly ironic Yes it would Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberevan Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 What made you decide to research this topic btw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatonesandwitch Posted September 12, 2015 Author Share Posted September 12, 2015 What made you decide to research this topic btw?I have my reasions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberevan Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 What made you decide to research this topic btw?I have my reasionsWen yer neibor is a pedofile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asrayl Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done." ... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they? I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it. syfy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuji Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done." ... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they? I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asrayl Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon) So you're saying a flamethrower is -not- in fact a serious incendiary device? May I ask what it is, then? I must have it confused with something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuji Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon)So you're saying a flamethrower is -not- in fact a serious incendiary device? May I ask what it is, then? I must have it confused with something else. That's assuming there is such a thing as a "serious"-anything device. It starts big fires? Yep! Starts lots of people on fire? Sure does! Is everyone suffering because of this? Nope!Have a little faith in humanity, just because people can own a flamethrower doesn't mean everyone's going to go out and toast their friends tomorrow night.If some psychopath wants to go on a murder spree, there's far more efficient ways of going about it, let alone starting fires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon) Actually there's several reasons they're not used much any more, some of them to do with treaties (they can't be used against civilian populations or undergrowth anymore, and there are several limitations beyond that as well that severely hamper their effective power). Aside from them being somewhat illegal to use these days, they're also much less practical than they used to be. They were fantastic weapons for thick, heavy ground fighting- which is not a combat tactic in play today, with a focus on tactical strikes, air superiority, and long range unmanned weapons. They were also extremely useful in conflicts like Korea where enemies hid in underbrush and- almost as importantly- tunnels. Saying "flamethrowers aren't a very good weapon" is as uninformed as saying "swords aren't a very good weapon" just because they aren't used in modern warfare. Warfare changes, that doesn't devalue the contribution of the weapons that came before. You could make the case "flamethrowers aren't as practical in the current form of warfare as they used to be," but saying they aren't capable weapons is misinformed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuji Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 They can be used against trees still, just not if the trees are the target, not that trees are much of a problem in most modern wars...But regardless, in this day and age, a sword, undeniably, is a poor combat weapon for the same general reason flamethrowers are. They're products of they're times. Hideous destructive things once, but now they're just novelties, regardless of what kind of history is behind them. So, yes, compared to modern fighting equipment, flamethrowers are no longer viable enough to pose a significant threat to the general wellbeing.And if you're somewhere that flamethrowers ARE being used against you, I think allowing the public to buy them off eBay is the least of your concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asrayl Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Have a little faith in humanity Afraid I can't do that. Humanity has shown me a hundred million examples of why I shouldn't have faith in it, and less than a hundred of why I should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 They can be used against trees still, just not if the trees are the target, not that trees are much of a problem in most modern wars...But regardless, in this day and age, a sword, undeniably, is a poor combat weapon for the same general reason flamethrowers are. They're products of they're times. Hideous destructive things once, but now they're just novelties, regardless of what kind of history is behind them. So, yes, compared to modern fighting equipment, flamethrowers are no longer viable enough to pose a significant threat to the general wellbeing.And if you're somewhere that flamethrowers ARE being used against you, I think allowing the public to buy them off eBay is the least of your concerns. Calling outdated things bad is misguided. That's all I'm saying. Relative to modern warfare tactics, no, a flamethrower is not particularly effective. But that's not even close to what you said in your post about it. Regardless, a things effectiveness in warfare doesn't translate to its ability to be used for severe civil harm. A flamethrower can kill a room full of people MUCH faster than a gun can, for instance (well, to be technical, they might not be dead right away but their fates will be sealed much quicker). It's also capable of being incredibly destructive to personal property. Am I for or against them being in the hands of civvies? Dunno. But denying their effectiveness is disrespecting the danger of a powerful tool. And, to be honest, people not respecting weapons is far more dangerous than the weapons themselves. Kajin and uberevan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepbro Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 What if you were to make a flamethrower sword? Wouldn't that be the ultimate close combat weapon?Actually a shotgun with a bayonet and flamethrower nozzle attached would probably be better come to think of it. uberevan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberevan Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?Or even better, conceal and carry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuji Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?Or even better, conceal and carryIf the situation requires a flamethrower, chances are concealing it won't be a problem. uberevan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepbro Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 What about a small flamethrower designed into a crotch piece. So you effectively piss fire at people? Kinda like that gun from dusk-to-dawn but blazing fire everywhere! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberevan Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 What about a small flamethrower designed into a crotch piece. So you effectively piss fire at people? Kinda like that gun from dusk-to-dawn but blazing fire everywhere!I doubt people could take you seriously even if they were being burned to death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajin Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?Or even better, conceal and carryI... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepbro Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 · Hidden by Kirrus, September 19, 2015 - No reason given Hidden by Kirrus, September 19, 2015 - No reason given Don't bio-weapons take some time to take effect? Wouldn't that rule them out of home defence? How about a tiny portable hand-held nuclear bullet launcher? In essence you are firing a tiny miniature nuke at people. One with miniature fallout and small ant scale explosions. Also one thing is really starting to bother me - ITS DEFENCE with a fricking C. As in C for "Crappy, Crackwhore & Cnut" fricking americans bastardizing our language and turning it into a muppets language for moron people!! Link to comment
uberevan Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?Or even better, conceal and carryI... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense. Do you know how easy it is to discourage bandits when you blast flames at them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuji Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?Or even better, conceal and carryI... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense.Do you know how easy it is to discourage bandits when you blast flames at them?You wouldn't even need the flamethrower if they'd legalize household landmines! Who'll rob your house if its covered in explosives? Ain't no bandit wanna deal with that. uberevan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatonesandwitch Posted September 22, 2015 Author Share Posted September 22, 2015 OH also IT FINALLY SAYS HOT FOR THIS POST HOW IRONIC uberevan and Jasonface900 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death Cog Unit Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) Never gonna find me raven bitch Edited June 16, 2018 by Death Cog Unit uberevan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberevan Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 My flamethrower consists of an aerosol can and a lighter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now