Buffy and Guns

I had thought of that but you get the much more visible aspect of the gunshot. The noise would be a problem unless they used silencers but even the sound would not necessarily lead the public to them if they didn't know what direction the sound came from.

Firing off tracer rounds makes for a visible light show, too much chance of the authorities getting involved at least, let alone innocent bystanders.

Then theres the "what if it has flammable blood" thing 😛
 
Personally, I always thought Buffy's hatred of guns was a bit odd, if a gun will kill a demon, use a freaking gun!

While perhaps in the show it's cooler to see combat up close, realistically it's pretty stupid, IMO. And I see no reason why the new Slayers couldn't get proper training to use firearms and have them handy, because they could kill a demon from far away using a gun and lessen the chance of them dying in the fight.
 
Yea, lol, but seeing Darla pull out two guns and let loose on Angel and Buffy was hilarious, but not 'awesome' Like kicking someones ass is.
 
Randy Giles said:
Personally, I always thought Buffy's hatred of guns was a bit odd, if a gun will kill a demon, use a freaking gun!
Click to expand...

I'm finding myself agreeing with a lot of your statements here lately. :drunk:

Unfortunately, because the creator of the show is violently anti-firearm, so is Buffy, despite the illogic of it all.
 
Blondie Bear said:
I'm finding myself agreeing with a lot of your statements here lately. :drunk:

Unfortunately, because the creator of the show is violently anti-firearm, so is Buffy, despite the illogic of it all.
Click to expand...


I didn't know that about Joss, though it seems that quite a few of the Hollywood crowd seem to be anti gun, which I find somewhat ironic considering all of the violent movies being turned out.

Strangely, Sarah is in the other camp, having stated that she grew up in a house full of guns and suffered no ill affects whatsoever.
 
Blondie Bear said:
I don't have an opinion about Buffy using guns, really, but I've always wondered why a shotgun slug to the chest wouldn't kill a vampire just as dead as a wooden stake. You're destroying the heart, aren't you? What's the diff?
Click to expand...

Is it because wood is poisoness to vamps and bullets aren't? I don't think I'm pulling that info from Buffyverse, but vamp novels....

I don't think Buffy should use guns in day to day slayer but WA is right, if a big bad needs blowing up bring out the hard wear. Its already been proven that Buffy would use a rocket launcher in a crowded mall to kill an undefeatable bad guy.
 
Jules said:
Is it because wood is poisoness to vamps and bullets aren't? I don't think I'm pulling that info from Buffyverse, but vamp novels....

I don't think Buffy should use guns in day to day slayer but WA is right, if a big bad needs blowing up bring out the hard wear. Its already been proven that Buffy would use a rocket launcher in a crowded mall to kill an undefeatable bad guy.
Click to expand...


In Bram Stoker's "Dracula," the count did indeed have a stake driven through his heart, but that was only to anchor his body to the ground so that he could be killed by beheading with a Bowie knife. Afterwards, his mouth was filled with garlic and buried below his feet "so that he would not rise again." It was only when Hollywood made the first "Dracula" movie that a wooden stake had any real power in and of itself to kill a vampire. In fact, the first vampire movie, "Nostratu," if my spelling is correct, portrayed the vampire as being impervious to anything but sunlight, "the blazing eye of God."

The mythology concerning vampires has grown and developed over the years more by what Hollywood has decreed and found expedient than by any folklore or folk tale.
 
E
Edmund Blackadder
Nosferatu there my good man
white avenger said:
In Bram Stoker's "Dracula," the count did indeed have a stake driven through his heart, but that was only to anchor his body to the ground so that he could be killed by beheading with a Bowie knife. Afterwards, his mouth was filled with garlic and buried below his feet "so that he would not rise again." It was only when Hollywood made the first "Dracula" movie that a wooden stake had any real power in and of itself to kill a vampire.
Click to expand...
Actually, none of that is correct as re: the original novel. Dracula is dispatched by having the Bowie knife driven through his heart while Harker beheads him with a Kukri knife. And he falls to dust immediately, so there was no filling of the mouth with garlic or burial. IIRC, Lucy Westenra's corpse is dealt with in that fashion after being staked, but not Dracula himself.
 
white avenger
white avenger
I defer to you in this matter, since I read "Dracula" as a high school project and that was over 40 years ago. I know that I read it SOMEWHERE, but it must not have been there. Thanks for the correction,
And in several of the films, silver is used to stab the Vampire in a similar fashion. Two of the later films involve somthing different, Dracula being killed by a Athame (blessed silver blade) and one of the ancient "golden" Vampires being killed by a silver short-stepping spear through the heart. And in one instance, a newly made Vampires heart being plucked out by a martial arts expert 😛 In each case the Vampire immediately dusted, well as immediate as 60's stop motion could manage. No wood involved.

Although then you have Carmilla. She was staked through the heart while a several foot long holy wooden shaft, head severed by an old ceremonial blade, burned on a funeral pyre, ashes cast into a river. Still came back that night, holy and antique stuff didn't cut it.

So yes guns could damage the heart enough for the Vampire to die, but in the end is it any more effective or any better an alternative than antique weaponry that has proven itself for thousands of years?
 
As research for my thesis, I'll be reading a book on vampires, so I'll keep you all informed of what I discover on this matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom