Why Don't Jedi Carry GUNS!

GUTB · Post by **GUTB** » 2002-12-27 12:50pm

Kyle Katarn is a part of the EU, most of which is trash.

Some people have an issue with basic logic. There is no reason for Mace Windu, given his perspective and knowledge of the universe to try and cut Dooku from behind. There is no reason to believe that Mace, or any other Jedi in his place, would even consider murdering Jango.

Also, there is no reason to believe that Dooku was caught by surprise. Two dozen Jedi are hard to miss by a master of Dooku's caliber.

There is no reason to believe that Jedi were not the best officers of a Republic military at the time of the war.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2002-12-27 01:48pm

GUTB wrote:Kyle Katarn is a part of the EU, most of which is trash.

Your opinion only.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2002-12-27 03:22pm

Jedi were keepers of the peace and not a military force. Keeping with that, the normal situation that a Jedi would need to fight would be against a small foe. Law enforcement rarely has to fight against an army, so a fight with say ten combatents would be more likely that one with thousands and heavy weaponary to go along.

So when the Jedi are being used in their roles (law enforcement) a lightsaber is more than adaquate for their purposes. In a military campaign it is clear that their law enforcement capabilities are inadaquate for that role (no shit huh?). That is why we don't have SWAT fighting against the Iraqi Republican Guard. SWAT is good at what they do, but they are not a military force. So, enter the clonetroopers.

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2002-12-30 10:51pm

It seems clear to me that Lucas was trying to evoke the samurai tradition with the Jedi lightsabre. The problem is that there were few guns to be dealt with on a Japanese battlefield during many periods; they were simply considered dishonorable, and weren't used, even when tactically desireable. While dishonor rarely has consequences in American society today, in (for instance) Tokugawa Japan in the case of the samurai it was of the highest consequence. While I don't recall the word "honor" being used in Star Wars, there is mention of The Code. Qui-Gon is ineligible for the Council because he fails to follow the Code. You can't have more than one padawan because, "the Code forbids it." Murder seems to be against the Code, as Master Windu considers it to be inconcevable that Count Dooku, an ex-Jedi, would commit murder.
"This weapon is your life." How many lives does a Jedi have? One.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-12-30 11:34pm

A blaster can only be used to attack, not to defend. It's a philosophical decision. My SW novel, of course, completely ignores this. My Jedi come fully armed.

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2002-12-31 04:37pm

SCRawl wrote:It seems clear that the Jedi ought to carry a ranged weapon, but don't because of some overdeveloped sense of honour or machismo. The benefits of, say, a blaster are obvious when confronted with a situation like we saw in AOTC, Kenobi v. Fett Sr. A slightly more mundane version of this situation could see a Jedi v. fleeing criminal, with a distance between them of, say, 100 metres. What's the Jedi to do, if even "Force Speed" isn't enough to catch up before the criminal takes off on his speeder?

No, the only reason why an active Jedi wouldn't pack a sidearm is to satisfy his/her arrogance. The lightsabre is an excellent weapon, suitable for many situations, but it doesn't cover everything.

Here's a better question: given the relatively small size and apparent weight of a lightsabre, why don't they carry a spare? Surely, given the number of times the characters in the films have lost their weapons (and, along with them, their ability to fight effectively) adding a second lightsabre to their utility belts wouldn't be such a bad thing....

Just my two cents today.

Time to poke the newbie. *poke*