A Chainsaw is the worst weapon to use in a zombie apocalypse.

I will go through the arguments backwards, starting with the chainsaw, then the pocket knife. 1) Chainsaw. My opponent brings up several points. Speed, range, angle of attack, noise, and blood. I will address each of these. Speed, [1, first video]. This video shows a small chainsaw, go through an 8 inch diameter tree trunk in 1 second. Going through a 2 inch rotting vertebra is not going to take so long you need to park in the long term carport. This also makes common sense, since the number of accidental amputations are not from a really slow cut, it is from something that happens in a moment. Range, chainsaw blade lengths can greatly vary, here is a 32" [2] and here is a 20" [3]. With your elbow planted into your stomach for support, you can easily have a range of 50", far more than the knife and well outside the range of a zombie's mouth. Angle of attack. The defense style is obvious, you can simply keep the tip pointed that the gut of the zombie. Zombies are not fast enough to dart around and attack, so you just let them walk into it. If you miss the spin as it goes in, you only have to move a few inches left or right. That severs the spinal cord and kills the zombie at a safe distance. The same cannot be said for the knife, which requires you get into an unsafe proximity. This fulfills the you vs 1 zombie for the chainsaw. My opponent also mentions that cutting limbs is not important. I would disagree. Cutting limbs will not "kill" the zombie, but it will disable it. Allowing you to either walk away, or kill it at your leisure. Noise. This one we can work several ways. Some might consider this as semantics, if so, please ignore (though I recommend to my opponent to not simply dismiss this and assume/hope voters call it semantics). Against a horde, one must realize that the only victory is escape. You cannot defeat the entire un-ending horde with any weapon, and whether you kill 2 or 20 zombies, if you die, then you die and it doesn't matter how many you took down. Against a horde, you can turn on the chainsaw and leave it somewhere. Let its noise attract all the zombies while you quietly escape. The alternative is that against the horde, one should assume that the zombies already know where you are. Otherwise, both weapons are equal in that you don't use them and sit quietly until the horde either moves on, or finds you. If we assume that the horde already is attacking you, then noise does not matter, and the defense posture pointed out against the single zombie will be more effective against the zombie, because once the cord is severed, you don't have to pull out, only swing sideways to face the next zombie (who is likely coming from another direction, not just next in line), you only have to cut through decaying flesh, not more bones. That brings us to the blood. My opponent is saying that I need to prove a negative, that something has never happened. This is, of course, an impossible request. My opponent also seems to misunderstand a "direct injection. " It is entirely possible that the virus dies in the air. Just like HIV dies in only minutes when exposed to the environment. Despite there being no cases of anyone contracting the virus in this method, my opponents tries to place the burden on me. 2) Knife My opponent has argued that you could stab through the eye sockets to reach the brain. This has two problems. First, in order to do so, you must be within arm's reach of the zombie, and place your hand VERY close their mouth. Second, my opponent applied a double standard. They think that it is too hard to hit a moving zombie in the spinal cord, but that it will be no problem to jab them in a 2 inch hole in a moving head. My opponent is also assuming the degree for which the bones decay. While they do get weaker, there is no sign that they will be weak enough that the knife can punch through bone. The steel used has higher carbon and lower chrome than most stainless steels, and so the metal is more brittle [4]. My opponent does not seem to consider how a knife would work in a horde setting. If you have to get within arm's reach to kill the very first zombie, you cannot get very far into killing the second before you are overrun. All in all, the chainsaw is better against the single (you can kill it from outside of arm's length) and better against the horde (whether you use it as a decoy or for defense). Let us now move into the closing arguments. [1] first video . http://www.youtube.com... [2] . http://www.baileysonline.com... [3] . http://www.glennyssupply.com...'-18'-20'.bmp [4] . http://www.thefabricator.com...