If I were choosing a sword, it'd be either an M1860 US Cavalry saber, or its Confederate counterpart.
From Byron Quick's remarks:
The problem isn't his choice of weapons. The problem is that he was not seeking the tactical advantage.
He probably didn't have a clue about tactics. It's kinda like Col. Cooper said, "owning a gun makes you armed like owning a guitar makes you a musician". Except in this case, owning a sword don't make you a ninja or samurai.
I'm not saying that I'll meet someone at twenty paces at high noon and take them with a sword when they have a gun.
Which goes back to the point of this thread- don't bring a sword to a gunfight, but, in light of...
But let me choose the terrain and the time and the dynamics of the matter will shift dramatically.
...I recall what Louis L'Amour wrote in
"Ride the Dark Trail". He wrote Logan Sackett as saying "don't sidestep a fight, but be the one to choose the time and place" (or words to that effect, it's been a while since I read it). When you do that, if you choose wisely, you have
all the advantage.
Had eight guys follow me into the woods at night once. They were counting on their numbers. After all, what can one guy with an old sawn off shovel handle do against eight guys? You couldn't pay one of them to follow me into the woods at night again.
This, I think, is a good illustration of what Col. Troutman was telling the sheriff in "Rambo: First Blood". "You can send a company of Rangers in there and he'll kill every one of them."
Ain't no such thing as a dangerous weapon. There are only dangerous human beings. And a dangerous human being is dangerous as long as he has one working arm and hand. You get in range of that arm at your peril.
This reminds me of some salt water fishing shows I've seen where they pulled up sharks. If you don't shoot the shark before you bring it on board, it's liable to take your leg off. People and animals accustomed to fighting to survive...