CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Best zombie apocalypse weapons , melee and ranged .
Pick one melee weapon and one ranged weapon and say why you think they are the best . The zombie attributes are normal , limp and slow with no ability to reason . Also , their body fluids cause infection if the make skin contact .
In order to kill a zombie you need to get at the back of the brain where the motor skills are . Shut that down and the zombie practically dead . You cannot kill a zombie by attacking the frontal lobe where the logic and memories are because that will not kill them . So , if a zombie attacks from the front and you need to hit the back of the brain this eliminates all blunt weapons as being useful . An effective weapon also needs to be light so you don't get fatigued , also it needs to require a simple motion to kill . This eliminates slashing weapons like axes , they are to heavy and even the light ones will cause fatigue because of the motion needed to make them deadly . So , we are left with light , stabbing , bladed weapons . This leaves the knife , machete , and spear . The spear has the biggest range so you can stop more zombies before you get overrun , increasing your chances of survival . The only two disadvantage of spears is their rarity , but they are easy to get before the apocalypse so better stock up . The other is their superior range makes them useless if a zombie is really close , so I would suggest keeping a short machete close by .
Ranged : Pistol , more specifically the glock 19
Zombies follow noise so really loud weapons are out , like shotguns . Also , the glock 19 uses 9 mm ammo which is easy to find . The rarity of ammo rules out rocket launchers , flame throwers , and any .50 caliber weapon . Mag capacity , fire rate , and quick reload rule out sniper rifles , hunting rifles , bows , and crossbows . So that leaves assault rifles , submachine guns , and pistols . I would rule out assault rifles as they are heavy and clunky . I would also rule out submachine guns because they burn through ammo quickly and that is not a pleasure you have in an apocalypse . Based on the criteria above it came down to glock 19 because it is reliable , has a good enough size caliber , has common ammo , quiet , has a high mag capacity , portable , easily concealed , and accurate . The only problem is range , but if they are so far away that I need a range better than that of a pistol I probably have enough time to run . And if they are that far and I still get boxed in an assault rifle won't help me .
Whatever your weapon of choice is you train and condition with it, meaning that a spear is not necessarily going to be more efficient than other melee alternatives. Spears can actually be heavier than some alternative melee weapons. Additionally, the spear is less versatile than other alternatives that allow both slashing and stabbing (e.g. sword)... which is not only more adaptive, but also permits the wielder to alternate between muscles groups without having to change weapons mid-combat.
If zombies are drawn to noise then any firearm will be problematic, unless you accompany it with a silencer. More importantly, ammo will run out fairly quickly and the capacity of production will be severely diminished. Conversely, many neurotoxins are naturally occurring in plants and animals which can be found in the wild or cultivated in small, personal quantities with few resources. Means of administration will also be most versatile, with the potential even that the same weapon can be used in both melee and range situations. This eliminates the need to carry around multiple weapons, most of them cumbersome (e.g. spear).
I don't care if a machete is more versatile , the slashing aspect is a bad idea as a slash will cause a high chance of you contaminating your self so I still stand by my choice . Also the length gives me even more protection . Also , you gas instead a melee weapon because your weapon don't make physical contact . It's is a ranged weapon you are using up close . Also , just because you can find a bunch of plants and makes your neurotoxin you still could gas yourself while making it or using it as a weapon . Also , any " melee weapon " you need to reload is bad idea . Also , my spear isn't cumbersome , it's light weight and easily carried . It also has a head shaped like a screw driver , which makes it more like a melee javelin but whatever . This shape allows it to go in and out easily .
I don't care if a machete is more versatile , the slashing aspect is a bad idea as a slash will cause a high chance of you contaminating your self so I still stand by my choice. Also the length gives me even more protection.
As if a spear has a low risk of contamination. Please. It draws blood and creates blood spray as well. All while having less versatility in use (both in terms of muscle group alternations and closer proximity fights).
Also , you gas instead a melee weapon because your weapon don't make physical contact . It's is a ranged weapon you are using up close.
This is like arguing that mace is a long distance weapon. An aerosol could actually be used in closer proximity than a spear could. That neurotoxins do not break skin is one of the distinct advantages in melee, precisely because it avoids the blood and other fluid spray inherent to the use of weapons like the spear.
Also , just because you can find a bunch of plants and makes your neurotoxin you still could gas yourself while making it or using it as a weapon .
Seriously? This is like saying that a spear would be useless because you could fall on it and die. Or that just because you have ammunition you could still shoot yourself in the face while loading your gun. Just as with any other weapon, if you have training you can handle toxins safely without risk of harm to yourself.
Also , any " melee weapon " you need to reload is bad idea.
Who says I would need to reload it? Aerosol can be created in high concentration and carried compactly. It could easily last the necessary duration of a melee. A gas agent (i.e. think tear gas canisters, but not filled with tear gas), could take out an entire zombie swarm at once; this is not only more efficient, but allows for exodus from further engagement.
Also , my spear isn't cumbersome , it's light weight and easily carried . It also has a head shaped like a screw driver , which makes it more like a melee javelin but whatever . This shape allows it to go in and out easily .
You entirely missed my point. My argument was that if you train with almost any weapon you can become energy efficient with it and use it for sustained periods of time.
Additionally, I guarantee that neurotoxin implements will be even less cumbersome, light-weight, and portable than your spear.
Note: You completely failed to refute my analysis about your choice of ranged weapon.
I clean thrust in and out of the throat isn't a complex maneuver . Also , mine weighs about two pounds and I have tested it and I can perform the action 110 times in a row easily with out fatigue . Also , like your whip blade is better . Also , way to dispute my argument when you can't even support your own .
Regardless , think about this . When using your bladed whip if you are spinning it and flicking your wrist like you said the blood on the blade will most likely be flying around because of the way you say you will use it . Like the description says , "the zombies body fluids will cause infection if skin contact is made " .
I mistakenly thought classification was consequent to use within a particular range, not by physicality of the weapon. The language was somewhat confusing to me. I went and looked it up more closely though and understand your point better now.
What would an aerosol (e.g. mace) be classified as? It does not actually have long range, but seems to fall outside the definition of a melee weapon...
The fact still remains that your weapon has a much higher chance of infecting you than my spear does of me . Your full body suit also will slow you if you try to run .
I'm incredibly quick, so I'd still be fast even with the suit on. And If I were to make a full body suit, I would make sure to make the suit out of light material anyway.
Also, it doesn't need to be a full body suit, I could just use regular clothing.
My melee weapon of choice would be a blade whip. It's easy to carry around, an effortless swing provides a 360 degree attack radius so that I can strike all the enemies around me if I happen to get surrounded, it has a long melee attack range and functions as a close range weapon as well. I've mastered the art of spinning my self at a high velocity , which will add a lot more power to the strikes. The blade whip is a perfect match for my elegance with melee weaponry .
(Disclaimer: I am not gun savvy)
My range weapon of choice would be an M16 with a 30 round clip.
It's powerful enough to shoot through multiple heads. Maybe 2 or 3.
And has a enough accuracy from a long range so that I can kill zombies at a safe distance.
I don't think there is a best weapon. It just depends on what you can handle, since every person doesn't have the same set of skills and build.
Your melee weapon sounds good in theory but how long is the blade ? Also if it is a slashing weapon it will be harder to get to the spinal cord or the back of the brain where the motor skill are so I'm not quite sure how well it would work out in practice . For your ranged weapon being a rifle it is good but it us also clunky so your screwed in a close quarters gun battle but I understand you not being gun savvy .
The blade whip has a sharp blade tip, exactly like a sword.
If I were to swing my arm in a horizontal motion with a slight vertical angle and then "snapping" my wrist and forearm up and down quickly, it will generate enough force so that the blade whip can thrust through the front of the neck and to the back of it, taking the zombies head off.
The whip is also flexible enough to fully caress the neck of a zombie.
With a gentle swing to whip the blades around the neck and then a quick and forceful tug, I can sever the spinal cord.
I meant clunky about the rifle , in a close quarters gun fight you won't be able to maneuver it well enough , also the long barrel could alert your possible human enemy to your location . Also , a whip blade sounds like a bad idea when you consider it is a sword on a rope , in order for a sword blade to get an effective slice it needs to be guided to make a clean cut and avoid getting your weapon stuck and based on the way you said you you would use it ( snapping your wrist ) the blade would probably just hit and do minimal damage . Also the 46 foot thing makes it even harder to control .
How do I need to be more specific ? I literally told you how it's size is a problem , you admitted to not being gun savvy so I don't see why you continue to argue your point of a rifle being the best ranged weapon . Alerting other people is an issue , it's the apocalypse so more likely that not other human beings will want to kill you for supplies . I pretty sure if a human was nearby they would be smart seeing that they are it far enough into the apocalypse to survive the initial outbreak and they would most likely be very stealthy so alerting them to your position is a bad idea . Also , my argument wasn't " it's a bad idea if your not skilled with it " . My argument was , even if your skilled with it it has a higher chance of failing than say a spear or machete . Also , your spinning idea will most likely make you dizzy and wear you down quickly and leave you vulnerable to attack . Also , if you get cornered in an alley way it will become harder to use , unless you resort to using the flick wrist method which as I stated earlier has a high chance of failing regardless of skill level .
I continue to argue because I'm aware of gun's size. But how it works is what I'm not savvy about. You have not made any arguments against the mechanics of the gun. And the only thing that comes close to the mechanics, is that you have argued that it is loud.
I don't see how the size would get in the way.
Telling me "its too big", isn't an explanation for why its too big.
I trust that I am smart enough to avoid being seen. Just because they can hear my gun, doesn't mean they will know exactly where I am at.
Even if they did, I would most likely have moved elsewhere by the time they reach my location.
All of those arguments amount to whether I'm am proficient enough with the blade whip to avoid those mistakes.
I would still have my gun. Getting trapped in an alley way isn't an issue when I can just shoot my way out.
It's to big because you could carry a pistol much easier , it's is also quieter . You can also conceal a pistol . If you stumble upon a group of friendly survivors they will see your non concealed rifle and think you are hostile , which will not go well . Also , the loud rifle will cause zombies to come to your position . Also , you said you would pick an M16 which doesn't have to easiest ammo to find . In addition the M16 itself is hard to find and is an automatic weapon and burning through ammo isn't a luxury you have in an apocalypse . Also , you talk about three different ways to kill a zombie with your whip . Spinning , snapping your wrist to get the blade into the skull , and wrapping to rope around the neck and pulling hard enough to decapitate it . Spinning is a problem because as I said in my last argument because you will get fatigued to fast , I don't care how proficient you are with the blade whip , fatigue is unavoidable when using a weapon . Regardless of weight fatigue will happen and that technique will drain your energy quickly . For the " rope around neck technique " , the amount of force you need to use to decapitate the zombie would be a lot considering the blade part is near the neck and without the momentum the blade would have a hard time cutting through the neck . This is supported by the fact you said it was a sword blade which needs momentum to be effective . For your third technique , " wrist snapping " , regardless of your skill level you have a higher chance of screwing up with this weapon than say a machete or hunting knife . Also , the wrist snapping would not build enough momentum to go through the skull . And if you aim for the throat , the wrist snapping would cause the blade to enter at an angle , lowering the chance of a kill . Also , when done with the kill you would need to pull the blade out at angle . Once again , something that would drain your energy . While this is probably the best method you could use for this weapon , it still is a terrible technique .
Chiming in with a nit-pick- an M16 is a select fire weapon, that can toggle between semi-automatic or full-auto fire. Some variants have a 3-round burst setting as well.
Also, 5.56×45mm NATO is one of the more common rounds to be found worldwide.
Well I meant not as common as say 9 mms or 22 cal . Also , he said he wasn't savvy about gun mechanics so him not only finding the correct round but also figure out how to toggle the semiautomatic / fullauto settings would be a challenge .
They won't consider me hostile as long as I'm not holding the gun. I'll even have it hung around my back side with a strap.
If any hostiles come to me, I'll kill'em. Simple.
Hard to find an M16? I have some buddies who own some. A privilege of living in redneckville.
I never said I would use the whip to get to the skull.
You honestly don't know how fast or how slow I would get fatigued.
Spinning is just to add more momentum for a better effect. Besides all melee weapons need momentum to be effective.
I practice with whips all the time, the technique I was speaking of is very effective. The blade doesn't always enter at an angle. It depends in many other factors. My height, the zombie height, arm positioning etc.
You say you practice with a whip , not a whip blade . Seeing as you only practice a whip you would have no way of knowing how the blade would work out . It doesn't matter if I know how fast or slow you will get fatigued , the fact is the technique you speak drains energy quicker than a conventional weapon . Regardless of your physical strength you will get fatigued and the method you speak of will drain your energy faster than normal . You say the blade entering at angle depends on the factors of your height and the height of the zombie and arm positioning etc . Unfortunately the height of zombies varies so where as I could aim for the throat every time easily with say a machete you will have to aim your extremely long melee weapon for the throat and this factor will render your spinning technique useless because if you are two short you will hit a tall zombie in the chest and the blade will bounce off and you will need to build momentum again . If you are two tall your blade will entirely miss shorter zombies . Say you have to swing at a zombie , if you swing horizontally and go for the neck the blade ( assuming it's on the ground because you just pulled it out of another zombie ) the blade will rise suddenly and regardless of arm positioning the blade will move unpredictably .
Also , the weapon you describe sounds a lot like a rope dart . Which the only practical way of using in a zombie apocalypse would be to place the dart on your foot and kick into the zombies throat in an attempt to sever the spinal cord .
If that is exactly it, I would have to disagree with your assessment of its usability. I bought one of these, and it does not stand up to the level of use you would see in actual combat. Granted, it did a lot of damage to the stuff I tested it on (some trees and a heavy bag), but it came apart pretty quickly.
Note that I'm not saying that the weapon as a concept is fundamentally untenable, just that this specific implementation that I'm personally familiar with has serious shortcomings.
The problem is the rivets, and the fact that its all stainless. It works great with no load, but it get the slightest bit stuck and apply pressure at any kind of angle other than straight on, and the 'links' between the blades warp and the rivets pop.
If you took the time to swap the link segments between each blade out for a different material, you might have something useful. I agree that it's cool, and I really wanted it to work well too :/
Make some blades that have a hole through the middle.
Make sure the holes are big enough to accommodate the whip but small enough so that it takes some tugging to get through the hole. This way it will be firmly attached to the whip.
Dude , I totally agree that's a sick weapon and looks really cool . That looks a lot like the sword Ivy uses in that video game , I forget the name of it at the moment :P
Did you mean 46 inches long? 46 feet doesn't seem like it'd be manageable in the slightest, or even usable, and I believe most of his objections to the weapon are based on that size. 46 inches would be far more usable and reasonable.
Thank you , in addition when you put a rope blade with that length into a zombie you need to pull it out . Meaning you would need to pull the rope to its full length .
Melee: katana or machete. In terms of pure killing ability, the katana is undoubtedly my choice. Practically unrivaled as the most deadly melee weapon ever, the katana is lethal and effective. It is light, easy to use, and will slice through a body like a hot knife through butter. For more general purposes, I think the machete would be a better choice. While it would still be able to hack through a half decayed body relatively easily, it is useful for many other things as well like hacking through a tree branch for fire wood, or smashing the lock off a rusted supplies box.
Ranged: any decent semi auto/select fire rifle. Contrary to popular believe, a shotgun is probably not the best choice of firearm when facing off against the horde. Instead of using a pump-action spas 12 in a failed attempt to blow zed into pieces, a single, well-placed rifle bullet will do the trick. Same reason why you wouldn't need a fully automatic gun. Unlike Call of Duty, one bullet to the head is a kill. Ammo conservation is a major factor in keeping your life, so accuracy is key, seeing as bullets don't show up in crates you randomly find. Rifles are the most accurate firearm, so this would be a good choice. While pistols can be just as accurate in close range, there could be many situations where you would need to pick off zombies from far off. Also rifles have bigger mags, so you would spend less time reloading, more time shooting.
I would have to disagree with the katana , katanas tend to dull quickly unless they are made of really high quality metal and extremely well made and they still need to be sharpened regularly to maintain their edge . Machetes are pretty good though . And a single shot rifle won't help in you have to cut down around 20 zombies . Kill one , take at least 5 seconds to reload and time is never on your side in an apocalypse . Also , rifles are kinda big and will weigh you down , not by much but enough to at least cause fatigue . Also if you run into survivors you won't be able to conceal your weapon , they will see the gun and automatically think you are hostile and that will not go well . Rifles are a good second pick for me but I am still going with the glock 19 . Pretty much everything else you said I totally agree with , you have really thought this out well .
And a single shot rifle won't help in you have to cut down around 20 zombies . Kill one , take at least 5 seconds to reload and time is never on your side in an apocalypse .
Yeah that was a mistake. A select fire rifle can still have a higher rate of fire plus a bigger mag than a pistol so less reloading.
Also , rifles are kinda big and will weigh you down , not by much but enough to at least cause fatigue .
Eh depends on what they're made of. I'd be willing to cary a bit heavier weapon than to be unable to kill a zombie out of pistol range if I needed to. But really it just depends on strength and endurance so I'm not saying rifles are better across the board.
Also if you run into survivors you won't be able to conceal your weapon , they will see the gun and automatically think you are hostile and that will not go well .
Not necessarily. And even then you don't have to carry it around 24/7. I agree, though, that a pistol would be a great choice, but either weapon could have pros and cons depending on the circumstances.
With the specifics mentioned, and the risks known I'd have to go with Shotgun for long range, and bat or club for short range. Here's why:
Depending on the level of decomposition, a bat can quickly knock the head clean off of a zombie, and if not that much damage at the very least it'll smash it's face in nice and good.
As for the shotgun, I'm going with that because it does not require much precision, it can spread it's damage. Also for the times where you can't get your hands on ammo, that other weapons need specifically, you can make your own for a shotgun that has no special rifling inside.
If you hit a zombie with a bat it will hit the frontal lobe ( my comment at the top tells how to kill a zombie ) . Unless you have really big muscles the force needed to knock a movie's head clean off you be to much . You get fatigued very quickly and easily overrun as you could not many zombies effectively . As for the shotgun it makes to much noise . Also if you have to pump it your wasting precious time .
Yea that's all bull hockey. It depends on the person, and someone like me, generally very healthy, and generally athletic, could swing a light metal, hollow bat around all day. Trust me, I have. As for the shotgun, that'd be my last ditch attempt.
I wouldn't be going around hunting zombies, i'd be looking for food, water, and shelter. If I encountered a zombie, I'd walk away. Using the zombie archetype you gave, escaping it would be no challenge for me, and if I had to I'd drop the bat in a second, making my escape even easier. If I did manage to find myself surrounded, I'd clear a path with my shotgun's spread, and quickly run through the opening before those slow zombies could get me.
The bat still will not kill the zombie . And if you get surrounded by a horde with a shotgun the shots will attract even more . Also , the spread will need to hit the zombies motor control in the back of the head . Considering the outer portion of the bullet would lose speed quicker than the middle portion you will kill and 3 max .
The bat will kill the zombie. If you can't prove how it won't you really can'y say for sure that it won't. I however have crushed decaying gourds with bats before, I imagine a decaying zombie head to be somewhat as mushy.
I won't be getting myself surrounded, trust me. However if anyone should find themselves surrounded by a horde of zombies, individual shots won't do you much good.
The spread won't need to hit it if it's big enough to blow the zombie's body to bits. They say you can only kill a vampire with a silver bullet, but you know what would work just as well? Grinding it's body up into parts so small it couldn't do any damage anyway, even if it is alive. How this relates to the zombies, is by shooting my powerful shotgun with a huge spread, I'll be blowing holes into the zombies capable of decapitating them for one, and just all around leaving them useless bodies, with either no legs attached, or poorly attached rib cages.
3 Max, is perfect. Three zombies blocking one opening in the wall of the zombies, will leave me just enough space to duck and cover through while they're all disoriented from the shot.
Melee: Rapid acting, aerosolized neurotoxin or gas agent. Minimal objective of sudden incapacitation without risk of bodily fluid contamination, with optimal outcome of death through neurological failure.
Ranged: Concentrated neurotoxin delivered by any penetrative range device capable of administering minimally incapacitating but ideally fatal dosage. While bodily fluid contamination is not an immediate personal risk, diminishing risk of exposure to other persons in greater proximity limits transmission.
They do, and within the parameters of the very argument you advanced. You wrote: "In order to kill a zombie you need to get at the back of the brain where the motor skills are." This establishes that there is brain function. Brain function is dependent upon oxygen. Ergo, zombies breath.
Any argument that oxygen is not needed for brain function leads to the formulation of an entirely implausible zombie made possible only by "magic". Forgive me, but I find that a meaningless and arbitrary pursuit defensible only by assertion.
Good point , really didn't think of that to be honest , but still the gas idea seems impractical because you need a lot of gas and you have a change of gassing your self .
That is why I led in with aerosol, which would be more of a spray similar to mace. Gas is more impractical, although certain gas agents are potent even in small quantities. The easy solution to gassing oneself, obviously, is to wear a gas mask.
Still , any melee weapon you need to reload sounds like a bad idea.
Who says I would need to reload it? Aerosol can be created in high concentration and carried compactly. It could easily last the necessary duration of a melee. A gas agent (i.e. think tear gas canisters, but not filled with tear gas), could take out an entire zombie swarm at once; this is not only more efficient, but allows for exodus from further engagement.
Note: The above response is identical to my other post to you on the matter. You may respond to it either here or there.
Also wearing a gas mask limits your field of vision.
That depends on the gas mask; not all cover the eyes (nor would that be inherently necessary, depending on the gas in question). This also in no way refutes the use of aerosols which do not require a gas mask.
Well, I also thought that I would use a bow and arrow. I think in the long run it is better than a gun because arrows are reusable and easier to make than bullets.