Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
While they may be used to hold others at bay, that is at the threat of damage.
So do most forms of self defense. It's not like there's a lot of people defending themselves from crime by wearing armor and carrying a shield.
They are intrinsically an offensive weapon, as they damage, not protect, which is what I think of when I think of defense. That is why I think it is funny. A shield I would consider a "Defensive Tool", or body armor, or armor plating. A projectile that damages flesh not so much.
Sure, but that's really just semantics. I was talking about people defending themselves from criminal acts. How one does that isn't really the point. I'm pretty sure I'm much more capable of defending myself and my home from an intruder with a 9mm pistol than I am with a shield. More importantly, as I observed earlier, I can defend someone in the area with the use of a firearm. Something I can't really do with a shield or armor. At least, not terribly effectively.