[Scalia Rules]

Swords certainly have a more noble lineage. In the days of yore, an apprentice warrior would train for years, ever seeking to develop a relationship with his steel. But then firearms came along, and any farm boy with a good eye and steady finger could drop you from 100 yards out.

I am a firearms enthusiast, myself, but I think I'd concede that the decline of the sword, and the attendant advent of firearms did have a decivilizing effect on society.

[Rightwing Canuck]

I agree. The knightly ideal took a nose dive once the cold steel of the sword was taken out of the picture.

[El Gato]

I think I'd concede that the decline of the sword, and the attendant advent of firearms did have a decivilizing effect on society

Actually the advent of the firearm, along with the ability of the yeomen to stand against the armored noble, probably helped usher in the era of the rights of everyman, rather than just the rights of nobles. While militia like entities did exist before firearms, it was only the advent of the relatively inexpensive and easy to use firearm, that made mininmally trained militia armies effective on the battlefield. One they had the guns, how could the fuedal Lords continue to subjegate them? Being civilized is all fine and good, but being free is much better.

[voicereason]

I am a firearms enthusiast, myself, but I think I'd concede that the decline of the sword, and the attendant advent of firearms did have a decivilizing effect on society.

Probably had a lot to do with the fact that the sword required people to get "up close and personal" and could require great effort on the part of those weilding it.