You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Silenced Weaponry

Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 5:48am

Post 1 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Rating: +6

There is something that makes me chortle quietly to myself about some things I've seen posted here not only as an FX Preset(s), but also in some of the stock footage I see that FX HOME is using to promote their product. I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes, least of all the FX HOME crew, but there needs to be something said for realism in movies/film, so please, don't yank my account for this guys, I love your program!

In the real world, I am a firearms owner (condolences go out to all the people whom live in countries where it's illegal to privately own one anymore).

I have had extensive training on how to use/clean/repair/ and respect them, and to teach others the same thing when required.

The relevance of this is important to the knowledge of which I'm about to pass on to all those who use this community as a gathering place for information sharing, and that is this:

If there is a silencer on your weapon in any of your films, in order to maintain a true sense of realism, THERE SHOULD NEVER EVER BE A HUGE, MEDIUM, SMALL, OR ANY OTHER SIZE IN BETWEEN MUZZLE FLASH coming out the end of the silencer.

It's there for a reason in the real world, and having worked with them in my past, I know for a fact that unless you are shooting a really hot load (meaning higher powder in the shell than what would be usual) there should be absolutely no muzzle flash.

Ever.

The purpose of the silencer is two-fold.

Number one it's used to keep down the volume of said noise (most people in the military/police/"mafia hitmen and anything to do with THE GODFATHER" use sub-sonic ammunition to completely remove the sound of anything being fired so as not to alert anyone nearby. The only thing you would hear with sub-sonic ammo is the loud snap/snick of the metal on metal as the shell is ejected and the bolt/bolt carrier return and chamber another round, and the sound of the empty shell casing hitting any hard surface nearby).

Number two, the complete lack of any muzzle flash hides your position from the enemy so he/she doesn't even know where it came from other than if they had been looking directly at the person being shot when it happened and seeing the entrance/exit wound on the body as it happened. Forensics would also come into play whereas the blood spatter effect would lend itself to some of the trajectory backtracking. Those would be the some of the indications towards a general area from which the round was fired from, but nothing else to indicate anything more concrete as to it's location of origin.

The best option for the realistic effect of a silenced weapon should be a simple quick and nearly invisible burst of nearly clear white smoke and a heat distortion image that disappears quickly. Maybe a post editing effect of the silencer smoldering out a few cigarette like strands of smoke tendrils, but that'd be about it. Those can be quickly created with Vision Labs Pro.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the desire to see something flashy and cool looking coming out the front of a firearm, I do that for real at least once a week, and in film it's very aesthetically pleasing to see that big flash come out and to watch the proverbial "bad guy" go down because of all the power behind it, but for realisms' sake, I'd reign it in.

Hope this helps someone keep from making a military/police/"mafia hitman and anything to do with THE GODFATHER" realism S.N.A.F.U in their films.

If you need to ask me what S.N.A.F.U. means, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAFU, because I'm not posting it's actual meaning here out of respect for the site, creators of FX HOME, and the little wee ones who don't need to hear it from my "internet lips"....LOL!

Thomas
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 6:31am

Post 2 of 91

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Thanks for the info, this will help people who are creating action movies featuring guns with silences to get a more realistic muzzle flash effect smile +1
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 6:46am

Post 3 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Jeesus, 1.9 terabytes of info storage on your computer? I bet it's all filled to, isn't it? I got a 200 meg installed, an a 500 meg outboard, and they are both getting fuller than I was hoping by now. Hey, no problem on the firearms factoid, just thought people should know before they get "made fun of" by all the other kids! I'm here to have fun, learn, and above all, share experience and experiences with people interested in film making. Haven't made any myself, but am in the process of pre-production for a huge music video session with my band. We write, record, produce, all our own music, and now, due to my ability to purchase this here little bad boy, amongst a few other programs (Bryce 6.1, Lightwave 9.0, Cinema 4D, Vue 6 Extreme) we'll be able to do just about everything ourselves inhouse. Should be an interesting year from now. We are trying to shoot a video for our album that we can master down to either a DVD, or CD Rom, or a mixture of both in one package. The music is going to be a conceptual album, nearly half of it is written, and the story line is fairly engrossing. It's going to cover one man's like from around the age of 6 until he is in his 70's and it's going to be strung together like a Pink Floyd The Wall ideology, where the music never stops, and the video never does either. Should be a long time making, but when it's done, I hope it makes people wake up. I'm somewhat political, and hate the way our world is going. I defer to "V for Vendetta" for any background ideology questions you may have...we all know something is wrong today in our world, and we don't know how to fix it....not yet, anyway, but hopefully time will tell. Anyway, here is a link to one of our songs (sans lyrical content, and it's not finished) but remember it wasn't shot with the camera I have now. But the idea we want to get across is going to put the timeframe between WWII and the present. Go to www.myspace.com/deathofcenturies to take a listen.

Thanks again, Redhawksrymmer!
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 10:08am

Post 4 of 91

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

What's realistic often is neglected in favour of what looks cool or what is exciting in films though, for example - the majority of demonstration footage show large MuzzleFlashes on M4 and M16 rifles when in reality there would only be a smoke ejection and maybe hints of a flash in dark lit areas even without a silencer.

I would know, because I did some of them. smile

In the short film we pretty much decided to forget about the silencer because cuts with more realistic flashes and sound work was simply boring and lacking impact. Sure, it's not realistic - but later in the film the main character snaps someone's neck with one hand, this was not an attempt at being realistic!

How you would handle things is up to you, that's the advantage of being a director of lead vfx where your artistic opinion is put to use.

-Hybrid.
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 12:20pm

Post 5 of 91

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I agree with Hybrid - as directors, we all have creative license over how fantastic we make things.

I mean, if we kept everything 100% realistic, there'd be a few good films, but a LOT of very dull and pointless ones.
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 3:25pm

Post 6 of 91

mercianfilm

Force: 210 | Joined: 31st Dec 2006 | Posts: 687

Windows User

Member

I'm glad you cleared it up for people! I feel that the style and script of the movie has to be taken into account- if it was a sort of spy/ espionage film then sure- you would go for the most ultra realistic look you could, and would probably follow all that you said in you post Black ronin. But if it was, like most movies, an all out action packed roller coaster ride of a movie- you want somethign that looks and sounds a bit cooler than ..well nothing.

Thanks for taking the time to exlain it to us though! I will take into consideration what you've said for future projects! Thanks

Sam
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 3:41pm

Post 7 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +2

I agree with Hybrid and Arktic on the fantasized part of muzzle flashes and such. It is entirely dependent on the look you want, not the realism.

black ronin1228 wrote:

for realism in movies/film, so please, don't yank my account for this guys, I love your program!

In the real world, I am a firearms owner (condolences go out to all the people whom live in countries where it's illegal to privately own one anymore).
While it's always helpful to give extra knowledge, watch the way you word it. Oh, and I really LOL'd when I read "my condolences..." and thought you were going to give them to those harmed from guns and you cotinued basically "for those who can't own a gun". Funny. Not trying to be a smartass, it was just funny and an unexpected sentence. smile
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 4:26pm

Post 8 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Films are all make believe! Bombs don't have big flashy displays and make tension 'beeps', cars don't blow up with huge mushroom clouds, and Bruce Willis can't jump roof-to-roof...just go with the fantasy[wink]
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 7:24pm

Post 9 of 91

Biblmac

Force: 852 | Joined: 12th Jun 2007 | Posts: 1513

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Thank you for saying this. If I said this I would have been ridiculed becuase I am new but I was getting tired of all the muzzel flashes when it didn't belong.
Posted: Mon, 13th Aug 2007, 3:34am

Post 10 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Biblmac wrote:

If I said this I would have been ridiculed becuase I am new
That is completely untrue. We are ridiculing him all the same. smile


Seriously, if you react in fear of ridicule like that.......I dunno, but try not to. This is a pretty open and respectful community. Despite showing some offside aversions every once and a while, people listen politely even to the most ridiculous or overasked things.

Although, to ridicule you a little: Whining about the realism of guns and showing your knowledge of them is ridiculous. The more realism we pump into them, the more people know about real ones. And I frankly don't care if it's your business choice to sell them, guns are bad. Keeping them looking that way in movies, IMO, is perfectly fine. Even if it means ridiculously magical-looking light effects. smile
Posted: Wed, 15th Aug 2007, 9:10am

Post 11 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Atom wrote "I frankly don't care if it's your business choice to sell them, guns are bad."

The irony here that made me chuckle a little bit more is not that you think guns are bad, that's definitely not the funny part, the funny part is that you're from Texas, probably one of the most pro-gun states in the whole US, second only to Vermont.

Not to get into a huge college level dissertation or argument for arguments' sake, but just so you know, guns are not bad. SOOO many people believe that firearms are bad, but then that's what the national news media spoon feeds us everyday, so it's no surprise. A gun will never ever hurt anyone on it's own, it's the intent of the user that's what makes it a good or bad gun.

I've known more people that have used their firearms in a positive way like self defense than who have had a firearm used against them in a negative way. When our own Government and the Center for Disease Control does a test study over 10 years and finds that the anti-gun act put in force back in 1994 by then President Bush Senior didn't make one single bit of difference in what types of guns were actually used in crimes, and the funniest of those statistics is this, all the crimes that took place where the weapons the law banned were actually used, was only 1 tenth of 1 percent, and those that did happen were perpetrated nearly 90 percent by law enforcement against civilians/citizens of this country, and never in a good way.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion(s), and to each his own. But remember this, you have the right to dissent against my personal views, and that's fine with me. You can disagree with me, and argue with me until you turn blue in the face, but before you say anything anti-gun, or try to publicly slander me as a gun fanatic, remember, someone with a gun fought for the very rights you are about to exercise.

T
Posted: Wed, 15th Aug 2007, 10:22am

Post 12 of 91

Mike2176

Force: 0 | Joined: 14th Aug 2007 | Posts: 4

Member

Interesting post, enjoyed reading it. I'm from the UK, and the only 'firearms' we're permitted to own are air guns. I've got 10, 6 rifles and 4 pistols. I don't know if I would want to own a real gun though, even if the law said i could. I've lived in Nottingham for the past 4 years, which is supposed to be the gun crime capital of Britain, but i've never seen any reason to want to carry a gun. I mean, I've heard gunfire coming from an estate i used to live on the edge of quite often, metres away, and I've seen the aftermath of shootings in the city, but as long as the people who carry guns only have beef with each other and you personally stay out of trouble, i can't see any reason to carry a gun.
I say leave your knives and guns at home and sort out your problems like a man, confront your enemy, then knock him out with what God gave you.
Saying that, i personally don't have a problem with guns used for sport, or hunting, as long as they're not turned on people, the problem is when they're in the wrong hands i suppose.
BUT... back to the subject of the initial post, i have to admit it does grate me when i see directors calling on their 'artistic license' over and over, as in the example of fire exploding from the end of a silencer, or a bus that can drive for miles with shot out tires on bare metal wheel rims. Then i suppose i prefer the 'real' in films, i would rather see a budget spent on good acting, locations, sound design and quality post production rather than OTT visual effects. A good narrative can support itself without the need for hyperbole. Then again, if a film is based on fantasy e.g. The Lord Of The Rings and the like, then that's a different story.
Posted: Wed, 15th Aug 2007, 1:39pm

Post 13 of 91

szczepanski

Force: 346 | Joined: 10th Aug 2007 | Posts: 227

Windows User

Member

my dad owns 4 guns, and one is just for me..
we don't use the guns in a bad way.
we only like to shoot at targets..
many people hunt animals with guns..
i think its kind of mean although kangaroos are highly over populated in australia. so maby i need to grow some balls. haha
sorry if i broke any reals in the last phrase
seeya
Posted: Wed, 15th Aug 2007, 7:17pm

Post 14 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Um...I am in the firearms industry. I have federal lic. documents and occupational tax stamps the allow me to deal, sell and manufactur firarms. Thats is to include Machine Guns, Silencers SBR(short barrled rifles). and so on.
Lets not go crazy here and blame inantimated objects for the actions of a few crazy folks. People die by the thousands from smoking, yet cigs, are legal to by. Cars mame and kill thousands of folks everyday, yet they are available to the puplic. People drink themselves into bankruptcy, drive and kill themselves and others yet beer is sold at every gas station! People have been beaten to death with a Tennis racket, bal bat gold clubs, hammers you name it, Yet I do not see a single person attempting to ban, or out law any of these things.
Guns CUASE CRIME like Spoons make people Fat, and Matches cuase Arson.
...That said lets talk about movie stuff! SILENECED (SUPPRESSED) weapons have very little if any flash, and the amount of smaoke is dependent on the rapididty of fire! a good deal of smoke actual comes from the chamber. Silencers are GAS traps!. I am glad I have the ability to own what ever I like.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:39am

Post 15 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Mike2176 wrote:

Interesting post, enjoyed reading it. I'm from the UK, and the only 'firearms' we're permitted to own are air guns. I've got 10, 6 rifles and 4 pistols. I don't know if I would want to own a real gun though, even if the law said i could. As long as the people who carry guns only have beef with each other and you personally stay out of trouble, i can't see any reason to carry a gun.
I say leave your knives and guns at home and sort out your problems like a man, confront your enemy, then knock him out with what God gave you.
Saying that, i personally don't have a problem with guns used for sport, or hunting, as long as they're not turned on people, the problem is when they're in the wrong hands i suppose.

Just in case you forgot, or the British schools failed to teach you accordingly, it was our country that fought against yours way back in 1775. If our country hadn't the opportunity to have such a plethora of "legal" firearms, I would still be speaking with your accent, saying things like bangers and mash, and paying tithes to the crown...as a serf no less. I don't have a problem with YOU doing that, but since I live over here, I think I'd have a problem with it. Barring the fact of course that would that we had lost, I wouldn't know any differently, but all that aside, I would have problem with it if it happened now.

There aren't many countries out there that like the US anymore, and my own personal opinion is I can't blame them. When I have a German neighbor who is 97 and saying she wants to move back to the fatherland because the same things that took place over there in Germany in 1938-39 that lead to the 3rd Reich are starting up over here. She said if you haven't seen the movies "1984" By Orson Welles, or "V for Vendetta", to get on it, and I told her I own both, thank you very much, and I already see what's becoming of my Country. One major reason to be a private gun owner here.

~Quotes~

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?"

"Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state."

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... such laws serve rather to encourage than to prevent homocides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." ('Commonplace Book' 1775)

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

"When citizens fear their government, you have tyranny; when the government fears its citizens, you have freedom."

All the previous quotes were made by Thomas Jefferson the 3rd President of the United States.

As for dealing with situations that absolutely require firearms, like let's say for arguments sake, a 120 pound woman against a 300 pound man, wouldn't you say it would make her the equal to, or be the equalizer for her protection against let's say rape, or possible murder, or both?

God gave me the ability to fight with my bare hands, and then I spent 18 years learning Tokagure and Ninpo so I wouldn't have to go through all the dancing most martial arts teachers espouse as a Kata these days.

Then I spent nearly 8 years in a paramilitary organization known as an Explorer Unit over here where I served the NYS Guard and got all the possible military training as I could from all the psychos (said lovingly of course since they were all Vietnam Veterans from all the differing forces). I know very well how to take care of myself, and my own, and I also teach firearms courses at a local range. All I can think of is one simple thing to say, and it is a direct quote,:

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." ~Sigmund Freud~ from A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis

As another of my gun friendly individuals has made clear, more people die from cars, cigarettes, shower slips, choking and such, but none of those things are banned. Check out the Center for Disease Controls' website. Do a search, and you'll come to the same conclusion, there are a thousand other things that people should ban....Oh, like let's say importing any kind of toys from China anymore....lead poisoning anyone?

In 2003 the CDC stated that more people were killed by blunt force/object trauma than by any other means. And the blunt force trauma was listed at around 80%....firearms were reported in the same study at around .10%, so you do the math.

Thomas

P.S. Creative license is fantastic, I love the idea and possibility that anything and everything goes, but for some of us who know what to look for, it gets to be a little cheesy to have to watch all the extra flashy stuff that is seriously unnecessary in film. But again, to each his own. I'd much rather see a movie where the guy goes down in the first shot, because that's real. I'd rather not see the bad guy get back up after 40 shots and once again NEARLY exact his revenge upon the main character. It's old, and sometimes the whole "Scream", "Die Hard" series of movies need to just go away. Sure, I love the action, but hey, if I could really jump 4 stories from the back of a plane I was just flying and land on hard concrete and skid along for another 40 feet and get up running, after all the other stuff he does, I think I might find myself with a better appreciation for the skills, but since that'd never really happen, it's kind of a let down, know what I mean? I know it has its place in the film industry, but leave the leaping into the air 30 feet and skimming across the leaves of some bamboo for the "Crouching Tiger-Hidden Dragon"
"Star Wars" genre. To be honest, the more realistic a movie is, the more frightening, and exciting it is for me anymore. Take the movie "Munich" for example...that's pretty real, and felt all the more real due to it's lack of huge effects. Simple.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 7:19am

Post 16 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

First off, your last comments are fueling the common feeling that America plays the gun-crazy blame game, and doesn't really help your argument. Actually, I'm rather offended that you would put something so narrow in an international forum that would jeopardize the integrity of a country that........well.........isn't just yours on these forums. For those of us that have to go to some great lengths to present our case and defend our homeland, what you wrote is counterproductive.

black ronin1228 wrote:

Atom wrote "I frankly don't care if it's your business choice to sell them, guns are bad."

The irony here that made me chuckle a little bit more is not that you think guns are bad, that's definitely not the funny part, the funny part is that you're from Texas, probably one of the most pro-gun states in the whole US, second only to Vermont.
Because..............geographical location has that much pertinence to convictions? Hmmm.........

(I'm a democrat too, take that! And I don't wear cowboy attire. Rebel! smile)

Not to get into a huge college level dissertation or argument for arguments' sake, but just so you know, guns are not bad. SOOO many people believe that firearms are bad, but then that's what the national news media spoon feeds us everyday, so it's no surprise. A gun will never ever hurt anyone on it's own, it's the intent of the user that's what makes it a good or bad gun.
Sure, a gun won't hurt somebody- but that's not the point. They are bad. The sole purpose of them isn't to prevent harm/defend, but to kill and damage- by action defending, and there's a difference.

It's your business, you're fine to present an argument for it, but it really makes me laugh. Guns are bad. To me, at least, it's one of the only irrefutable facts today.

Read and resurrect the thread "Are guns BAD? Debate!", if you really want to discuss this. (although that really turned into a nasty Anti-America fest pretty quick and then retaliated into an anti-everyone fest. Big bad mojo, but if you want to go into it, go ahead.) The search tool is your friend.

I've known more people that have used their firearms in a positive way like self defense
Again, like I said about 'self defense'. Guns maybe offer some comfort or protection, but it's only through the action of harming another or using intimidation. Both of which are negative traits.

Guns. Are. Bad.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 11:51am

Post 17 of 91

szczepanski

Force: 346 | Joined: 10th Aug 2007 | Posts: 227

Windows User

Member

guns aren't bad, something can only be bad if it acts on its self, in this case guns don't, the user is the bad one if he uses it in a negative way.
guns.aren't.bad.
FULLSTOP
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 1:13pm

Post 18 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

True, guns in and of themselves are not inherently bad, but the glamourisation of them does encourage a lack of reverence. Movies show guns as toys, with no consequences - you don't even need to get your hands dirty as you would harming someone with a knife. It's one of the things that really bores me in these forums - so many 12-year-olds who want to film shootouts because we perpetuate the idea that guns are just a bit of fun really.

And don't get me started on 'gangster rap' (even if 50 Cent's 12 years for grannymurdering is really 3 weeks for jaywalking, the glamourisation of violence in any form can not have a positive effect on community)
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 1:38pm

Post 19 of 91

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

All I know is that once I put a gun in one of my movies, this guy Bill Black saw it and started kidnapping and pistol-whipping my friend Jake's brother. I sent Sam Fisher on the case, but it was no good.

Guns = awesome badness.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 2:22pm

Post 20 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

I can film a few shots of actual weapons being fired suppressed and un suppressed. as well as some shots of the ejection port. You will see that there is a agreat deal of smoke(gas) being expelled from the ejection port.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 2:43pm

Post 21 of 91

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

This is an interesting topic, and one which I've commented on many times in the past. I won't repeat my arguments in depth here, but I think that whilst some of your points, black ronin1228, seem logical - I still can't see any reason to own a gun, other than for hunting and sport. All arguments for self-defence are rather pointless, because the facts show that owning a firearm in the house INCREASES the chance that you'll get shot, or you'll acidentally shoot a loved one; a gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting, a criminal assault or homicide, or an attempted or completed suicide, than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

Here's a couple of quick snippets of what I wrote in the "Are Guns Cool? Debate!" thread:

On the number of deaths per year caused by firearms, I wrote:

I checked the most recent statistics I could find - in the UK in 2002 there were approximatley 0.13 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people. In the USA in the same year, there were 10.50 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people.

So that's 81 deaths in the whole uk for the whole of 2002, where gun control is very strict.

But in the USA, where there's very liberal gun legislation, there were 30,242.

That means that EVERY SINGLE DAY in the US, there are more gun related deaths than for the WHOLE YEAR in the UK.

Sure, some people being shot are criminals by home owners shooting in self-defence, but the statistics show again that there are many, many more handgun offenses committed than people shooting to defend themselves; in 2003, there were only 163 'justifiable homicides' by private citizens using handguns to protect themselves - compare that to the approx 30,000 people killed in total.

On the subject of gun ownership reducing crime rates, I wrote:

...in the USA, where there's more chance a potential burglar will be facing an armed citizen, there will be less burglaries, right? Because armed citizens is a reliable deterrant for crime, yeah?

Well, no. In the UK, there were 677,373 burglaries in 2004 (as defined by Home Office data), so that's an average of 8.9 burglaries per 100,000 people. Seeing as there was 2,154,126 estimated burglaries in the USA for the same year (as reported by the FBI's crime statistics), which is a staggering 735 burglaries per 100,000 people, it's safe to say that the ownership of guns does nothing to reduce the rate of burglary.
You should read the whole thread, it's really interesting, with some great points made by people on both sides of the discussion. You can find that here.

Oh, and as for:

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." ~Sigmund Freud~ from A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"...

I'd also like to point out that Freud also said:

"America is a mistake, a giant mistake."

Make of that what you will wink

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:03pm

Post 22 of 91

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

black ronin1228 wrote:

As another of my gun friendly individuals has made clear, more people die from cars, cigarettes, shower slips, choking and such, but none of those things are banned.
It's an invalid comparison, for a simple reason: Cars, cigarettes, showers (which are slippery) and food (which can become lodged and choke) and not designed to inflict harm/kill. Their purpose is to aid transportation, relax, bathe and provide energy.

That they can also kill isn't particularly relevant. A coffee cup can kill somebody (just ask Riddick), a pen can kill someone (just ask Nightcast)....ie, anything can kill somebody - but the point is that they're not designed to do so.

A gun, however, is designed to kill or severly injure someone. So it's clearly a completely different situation.

Anyway, as has been pointed out, the old gun thread is probably a better place to continue this, but I just had to point out that invalid comparison first. smile

Other than that, though, some really interesting points, Black Ronin. Interesting how you're very pro-gun, despite having quite an anti-government political stance. That seems fairly unusual these days, for some reason.

I should also apologise for some of the blatant unrealistic muzzle flashes around the site, as well as the completely unrealistic gun sounds. Unfortunately we don't have a massive budget, so we have to work with what we have - at which point it becomes about selling the products.

In other words, a realistic video without muzzle flashes and only a tiny firing noise wouldn't sell many copies of a muzzle flash generating program. wink


Oh, and amusing counter-quote from Freud there, Arktic. I think it just goes to show that, generally speaking, it's best to completely ignore anything Freud said. smile
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:08pm

Post 23 of 91

Rockfilmers

Force: 2182 | Joined: 10th May 2007 | Posts: 1376

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I don't think a compleat ban on guns is the anwser. Sure there are a lot more gun related deaths in the US then in the UK, but also the poplulation of the US is plus 300,000,000 where as the UK is only 60,000,000.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:10pm

Post 24 of 91

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rockfilmers wrote:

I don't think a compleat ban on guns is the anwser. Sure there are a lot more gun related deaths in the US then in the UK, but also the poplulation of the US is plus 300,000,000 where as the UK is only 60,000,000.
I'm pretty sure the statistics take that into account. smile

However, I tend to ignore statistics, as they can be manipulated pretty much any way you want. A good, reasoned argument is almost always more interesting and useful than a bunch of numbers.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:15pm

Post 25 of 91

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Can we please not make yet another thread stoop into gun law discussion, or UK versus USA etc?
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 3:20pm

Post 26 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

FREEEEEDOM!
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 5:45pm

Post 27 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Kid wrote:

FREEEEEDOM!
Nice. smile
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 8:02pm

Post 28 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Ok, ok. Look people. I am all for personal freedom. I dont care a bit where you live. Uk, USA.
If you don't like guns, then dont have one! If you want to smoke yourself to death Do it!(Dont MAKE me breath the second hand smoke)If you want to fall head first into a bathtub full of burbon everynight go for it. Just dont drive home and Kill me or my family afterwards. If anything you call a RIGHT infringes on my Rights then theres where I draw the line.
Where I live here in Arizona (USA) we can/do legaly carry guns. We do not rely on our goverment (State or Federal) for protection from criminals. Do we still have crime, and murder here? Of course, But not becuase we have Guns! LAWS EFFECT THOSE WHO ABIDE BY THEM. Criminals wouldnt care a single bit if they banned guns. They would still have them and WE WOULDNT!
I do not own a Gun becuase I am in fear of criminals, or anything else I own them becuase I can. I have no desire to Kill anyone, I do not even hunt.I like them for the same reason car collectors like working on their favorite hot rod. Guns are like a fine time piece, ever seen a real VICKERS GUN, Fired a Vickers gun? I have and It is a work of mechanical art!
As for banning ciggeretts Come on now. They KILL period! it dose not matter WHY they were made they KILL. EVER watch someone die from a smoking related lung disease? Id take a bullet any day. Guns are used in the Olympics, are Marlboros?
80,000 people a year are killed by their doctors making a mistake.Should we outlaw doctors? Look people have been killing each other one way or another since time began. if all guns were banned and collected right this second then poeple would still kill each other.Thats the nature of it. Good, bad or other wise thats the way it is. Guns were made to kill? so were Bows& Arrows, Spears, Knives. So...?
I live in a country where 80 million people own guns. No country will ever invade us, no goverment will ever rein over us as a dictatorship, or monarchy. You will NEVER switch on CNN and see UN tanks sitting in time square. If you want to rely on a goverment to dictate whats best for you, or rely on them to protect you from ???? then you are a fool!. An unarmed person is a Subject.

Blame The motion picture industry for its Unrealistic portrayals of Weapons. One round of 9mm, .45acp. 5.56mm, 7.62mm wont make a car explode even if it went right through the fuel tank. A 12Ga. shotgun will not blow a 13" hole in the wall.An uzi wont fire 200Rds from one magazine (Miami vice) a Man can not take an M16 bullet in the shoulder on monday and be back at work on tuesday. A police car can not take 400Rds from an M60 machine gun and then drive down the road....not far any way!
WE ARE HERE ON FxHOME TO.....
PLAY make believe, have fun, make movies have tons of unrealistic muzzle flashes,Lightsabers cutting through steel doors. I go to the movies to escape the REAL world. If I want real I watch the news.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 8:27pm

Post 29 of 91

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Problematically, the next great war probably won't be fought with weapons that be defended against with household fire-arms. All the hoo-rah about being impossible to invade is rather silly as history has demonstrated that civilisations that become a hassle to conquer tend to simply be eradicated.

In any case, this is all off topic. The legalities/moralities of legally owning a fire-arm has nothing to do with this thread, which is predominantly about movie-world. A land where laws, physics and plot cohesion do not necessarily exist at all. We are indeed here to play.

-Hybrid.
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 8:49pm

Post 30 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

If someone "Eradicted" the USA who would feed you? Defend you against your Goverment? Buy your Cars, Cheap appliances, and so on.
One thing you are corect about. This is a forum for Special effects, and Movies stuff. I for one am sorry I even replied to the B*&^$ SH*^ thats on ehere about the Morals of guns. I got em, Im keeping them and I dare any one to try and take'em!

I rest my case..You have the right to dissagree. And I would fight for your rights to do just that.
Long live the Queen, and God Bless America!

Lets make some unrealistic movies
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 8:54pm

Post 31 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

a) as hybrid has pointed out a tank can drive into time square and your puny handgun will do nothing to stop him

b) there are so many chinese people that if they decided to invade you could shoot as many dead as you like but you would run out of bullets before they stopped coming
Posted: Thu, 16th Aug 2007, 9:04pm

Post 32 of 91

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

I live in a country where 80 million people own guns. No country will ever invade us, no goverment will ever rein over us as a dictatorship, or monarchy. You will NEVER switch on CNN and see UN tanks sitting in time square.
I'm sure that's what the Roman Empire thought.

And the Egyptian pharaohs.

And the British Empire at its height (ok, the UK still hasn't been invaded, but the Empire is decidedly gone).

And...you get the point.

Pride, as they say, goeth before a fall.

It's just a simple fact of the universe that nothing lasts forever and, sooner or later, everything turns to dust. You can't really rule out certain things because history (or future history) has a habit of doing unpredictable things in unpredictable ways.

As Hybrid points out, if invasion is too much hassle, there are only two other options - leave them alone, or remove them from the equation. Although I doubt that option 2 would be achieved through military actions, these days, as was the risk in the Cold War. It's far more likely that world power will shift entirely through economic forces. It'll likely be a slow and subtle shift, rather than a big boom. And that's before even considering potential internal strife. Obviously I'm talking long-term here, as in hundreds of years (well, probably).

It's a thoroughly interesting topic. It's odd how things that can seem so solid, and timeless, can completely disappear 500-1000 years down the line. I wonder what the various Roman Emperors would think if you showed them the modern world? I found this recent article fascinating, for example:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6939024.stm

When that was built, I imagine it was inconceivable that it would one day be buried under a load of dirt and mud.

It's entirely possible that I've strayed off-topic. razz

Anyway, aren't silenced weapons great!
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 1:16am

Post 33 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thank god for anarchy.
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 1:28am

Post 34 of 91

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Xcession wrote:

Can we please not make yet another thread stoop into gun law discussion, or UK versus USA etc?
Thank you. Well said. Opinions differ, and all these points have been made already in the previous thread, to an extent where everyone is simply stating a variation of a theme.
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 1:35am

Post 35 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

It's a thoroughly interesting topic. It's odd how things that can seem so solid, and timeless, can completely disappear 500-1000 years down the line. I wonder what the various Roman Emperors would think if you showed them the modern world? I found this recent article fascinating, for example:
mmm many people don't even realise that america only became a superpower since wwii. China is really developing quickly businesswise too, I think big changes will start to occur within our lifetimes if not sooner.
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 3:30am

Post 36 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

I understand that there are pros and cons to every single situation in the world. I'm happy that there are so many vocal people on both sides of this debate, but I will still keep my guns for sporting, hunting, and self-defense, and regardless what anyone thinks, I'm never going to give them up freely. Why?, because I don't have to. It's that simple. Enjoy your filming, that's all.

T
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 4:08am

Post 37 of 91

szczepanski

Force: 346 | Joined: 10th Aug 2007 | Posts: 227

Windows User

Member

definatley what black ronin said!!! ^^^
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 4:32am

Post 38 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Kid wrote:

Tarn wrote:

It's a thoroughly interesting topic. It's odd how things that can seem so solid, and timeless, can completely disappear 500-1000 years down the line. I wonder what the various Roman Emperors would think if you showed them the modern world? I found this recent article fascinating, for example:
mmm many people don't even realise that america blah blah, masking an argument against someone other than yourself, etc., etc....
Of course. smile

I agree with Hybrid and Bryce, who agreeably disagreed completely on the gun debate thread if I remember correctly. smile
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 9:47am

Post 39 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

I love this thread - I'm sorry it's way offtopic now, but that's how conversations go in the real world. And discussion is so important in getting to know (and hence less likely to dehumanise/want to kill) people with views that seem alien to us.

Now, as for crushing the uncrushable America - one of the simplest jobs going - quote all oil in Euros instead of dollars, all that $40,000,000,000,000 dollar defecit will start to be called in, bye bye American Dream...inflation would knock USA back before it could start fighting. Putin and some OPEC countries are already keen. Putin's even used it as a bargaining chip for getting Russia into the Eurozone.

I'm not trying to scare anyone, rather the opposite - Sept 11th 2001 was an attack on US home ground which shook up a lot of the invulnerablists. In fact the only reason the US has had it so easy is the low taxes, low inflation, massive war-chest - and 40-odd trillion dollars of free loans contribute massively to those - don't get into the genuinely dangerous position of complacency, it'll be your downfall.

Not politics, but economics...
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 3:43pm

Post 40 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Quick question, pdrg: Are you an American?

Your theory on economics seems plausible and all, I'm just wondering.
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 8:16pm

Post 41 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Rating: -2

China ownes enough US savings bonds that if they cashed them in it would be impossiable for the USA to cover them. the could in fact Kick our ass without ever firing a shot. thats the hard cold fact. On the other hand.....Seeing as Very few countries have ever payed us back a single cent we have loaned them, I see no reason to even try and make good on their Savings bonds.....
Funny how we (USA) are the first to offer our help to the world, First to get blamed for their problems, and the Last to get a Thank you.If not for US France and england would be speaking GERMAN, China would be speaking japanese, along with austrailia. More of our Soldiers are buried in europe than in the United States. If it were up to me I would seal the Border, deport every Non american, and withdraw every single American soldier from everyplace! SUadi arabia , Iran, Iraq are not the only place on this rock with oil. studies have shown our oil here could last 50,0000 years. I PROMISE not to reply on this thread again. SOMEONE PLEASE LOCK IT We could do without you,china, france and so on.....could they say the same?
Posted: Fri, 17th Aug 2007, 9:12pm

Post 42 of 91

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:


Funny how we (USA) are the first to offer our help to the world, First to get blamed for their problems, and the Last to get a Thank you.If not for US France and england would be speaking GERMAN, China would be speaking japanese
Rubbish! I assume you're citing WW1 and WW2 here as examples of the USA being the first to wade in to the rescue and the fact is that in both cases America entered very late in the game and I'd go as far as to argue that even then it was reluctantly and only for their own gains. In both cases the USA had (supposedly) been persuing an isolationist policy and (supposedly) wanted little to do with Europe or Asia; if they'd wanted to save the world they'd have been involved from the start. Only when it seemed that they were under threat. In WW1 this would be the sinking of the Lucitania and a certain telegram which made them believe the Mexicans were planning an attack with Germany (albeit there's a strong possibility this was forged by Britain to convince America to join the fun) and in WW2 this would be the attack at pearl harbour. Also consider that if the Allies had lost there was absolutely no chance of seeing any repayment of the money they'd loaned wheras if they trounced the Germans they could claim all sorts of things as reparations. Be under no illusions, America did not come riding in on a white horse just so that I wouldn't have to learn German, they did what any country would do and acted to protect their own interests.

I'm definately not anti-american and I don't want to derail this too much but I get sick of this fairy tale that seems to crop up in discussion (plus I've recently finished my A level in American foreign policy during this period).
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 12:43am

Post 43 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

studies have shown our oil here could last 50,0000 years.
That's a lot of oil at the rate it's getting used, and a far higher figure than is normally quoted. I'd like to look into that - if it's true, then it would be a fascinating insight into both sustainability and its influence on US domestic and foreign policy. It makes me wonder why the US would ever buy expensive foreign oil. Do you happen to have a reference to the report/calculations I could use as a basis?

Atom, no, I'm global wink
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 3:57am

Post 44 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

There's no need to bring up WW1 and WW2 sentiments now. We should all know by now that it was entirely a group effort, although for America I will say this:

We have our greats and our horribles in WW2. On one side, we 'let' by some people's terms the Nazis exterminate the Jews and other ethnic groups, whereas on the other side, we entered into war without an assured knowledge that Hitler nor the axis would spread into the U.S., meaning we did it (at least somewhat) for the simple good of mankind. Knowing full and well the majority of all American men of-age and all of my older relatives either died or served in WW2, I can hardly say it was an effort simply for the benefit of America. The soldiers didn't believe that and neither do I. (Although the UK certainly had a large role as well.)

I won't muck this up too much, and as I see you share similar thoughts, Rawree, but I thought possibly someone with a more level-head on the subject from the U.S. was needed. (Of course we pursued isolationism! That's good governing if it's effective and learning from the mistakes of WW1. smile)

So, you give and you get some in it. Hardly something you can argue fully or call complete rubbish from another end.
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 10:19am

Post 45 of 91

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

For some reason I was very surprised to hear that you were a Democrat Atom. Anyway, you're right on the money, it was down to involvement from several different nations and it'd be silly to suggest that it wasn't but I think people tend to have a much more fluffy view of the reasons for those nations getting involved. To flip it on its head; people tend to think that the British stood up and went to put a stop to the spread of German power because it was the right thing to do and we could protect Europe because we're so good at war. More likely it's because we didn't like the prospect of being told what to do by someone else (perfectly happy to colonise half the world though you'll notice) and it stood to reason that we could be somewhere on the Nazi hit list.

Atom wrote:

We entered into war without an assured knowledge that Hitler nor the axis would spread into the U.S., meaning we did it (at least somewhat) for the simple good of mankind.
A Nazi invasion wasn't really a big issue for the USA, the main problems America faced were the risk of attack from the Japanese on their interests in the Pacific and a loss of their power and influence in that area and in Europe, given that they had invested large sums in the allies, the worry was that there would be nobody to pay back the debt if we became Hitler's newest colony (remember that the US still had a lot of recovering to do from the Depression and a lot of historians agree that Roosevelt realised he could cash in on the war). As for leaving things too late I'll admit that a certain Mr Chamberlain was perfectly happy to let Hitler stomp all over Europe until he looked like he could be a serious threat. Basically nobody got into the war for the protection and glory of mankind.

Just as an interesting sidenote in actual fact the USA persued a very (deliberately) ineffective isolationist policy and was involved substantially behind the scenes in Europe, the Pacific and Latin America. I think you'll agree that nobody seemed to show that they learned a thing from WW1.
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 11:43am

Post 46 of 91

Mike2176

Force: 0 | Joined: 14th Aug 2007 | Posts: 4

Member

blimey black ronin1228, it seems you took what i said as an insult to you or to your country, I'm not quite sure which, but I assure you that is not what i intended.
Perhaps i should re-iterate what i meant.

If a person, regardless of nationality, feels the need to carry a gun amongst a population of others who do not bare arms, and it is not their purpose to do so, then that person is an insecure pussy.

Perhaps that's slightly easier for you to grasp my chap. And of course I'll be sure to give your regards to the Queen next time we meet for afternoon tea............nonce.
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 7:49pm

Post 47 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Dear Mike2176,
I do not carry a gun with me at all times. I keep one of the many in my house unlocked whilst I'm there as an easy opportunity to utilize should someone feel the need to break into my house and try to take something of mine, including my life.

I never said I carried a firearm with me everywhere. If I could, being that this is New York State, the "Empire State" and I don't mean that in a good way, I would.

But it just so happens that the judges in this state, and in particular, my county, are all a bunch of "insecure pussies" themselves, while not letting the rest of us carry a firearm for self defense, nor are they willing to dole out any concealed carry permits without said person requesting said permit providing "reasonable cause" to be allowed to do so.

An "insecure pussy" I am not. Just curious if you read the whole posting?

I don't take any offense against someone jabbing America, not in the least. Most people make the same mistake with me, and have for most of my life. That mistake would be that they forget that their opinion of firearms and firearms ownership would have to matter in order for me to even care in the first place.

I don't care.

I can have guns, I will have guns, and when my government says I can't have them anymore, then they will either be buried until such time as it becomes necessary, or used immediately when it becomes necessary to feed that good old tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants and patriots.

So Mike, no offense, and none taken.

P.S. Will it be Earl Grey?, since honestly, that is my favorite. I drink about 2 liters of it every single day...no kidding. Also, when you say airguns, do you mean a pellet/BB rifle, or the more fun to play with kind like what is found here www.precisionairsoft.com If it's the latter, then we have something in common. It's called this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-MP5A3-w-Tactical-Light-p/car050.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-SLR105-A1-p/car105.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-Armalite-M15A4-RIS-p/car072.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-SCAR-Light-p/car200.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-CA25-p/car074.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-M249-MKII-p/car510.htm

& this...

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-M249-MKI-p/car509.htm

but this is my favorite. People hate me when we go play at a couple of the local fields....

http://www.precisionairsoft.net/Classic-Army-CA249P-p/car520.htm

I also recommend these...

http://rap4.com/paintball/os/rap4-revolver-grenade-launcher-p-931.html

http://rap4.com/paintball/os/series-markers-desert-eagle-c-21_158_392.html

http://rap4.com/paintball/os/series-markers-rap4-c-21_158_352.html

Take a look around here...

http://rap4.com/paintball/os/series-markers-custom-markers-c-21_158_39.html

and this page as well....some sick nice ones here. I don't own anything on this page below....at least not yet!

http://rap4.com/paintball/os/markers-extreme-custom-c-21_223_226.html

I've been collecting and playing for quite some time. I have all the stuff in airsoft, as well as the three first listed items for paintball, amongst some other goodies...land mines, grenades and such in both airsoft and paint ball. I can honestly recommend the RAP4 Airsoft conversion, based solely on the simple fact that you can completely immerse the rifles into the water, pop out and fire almost immediately. Let the water drip out a second and fire away.
Posted: Sat, 18th Aug 2007, 9:50pm

Post 48 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

That mistake would be that they forget that their opinion of firearms and firearms ownership would have to matter in order for me to even care in the first place.
Ahhhh........the good old 'asshole' mentality. Good luck living life with that. smile

black ronin1228 wrote:

Dear Mike2176,
I do not carry a gun with me at all times. I keep one of the many in my house unlocked whilst I'm there as an easy opportunity to utilize should someone feel the need to break into my house and try to take something of mine, including my life
So.......expecting a good number of people to break into your house all at once from different areas to justify having numerous firearms for 'self defense'? Just wondering, as I know probably the maximum number of guns you could fire at once is 2 for self-defense, and only if the situation opened itself up. Why in the world would you need more than that? And it's okay if you just like guns (we all love them in movies! smile), but don't try and spin 'self-defense' my way if you have more than 2 in a single building/home.

As for you, Rawree, I got a little turned around in what I was saying as far as isolationism. I meant we ineffectively did it to try and prevent another WW1.

black ronin1228 wrote:

when it becomes necessary to feed that good old tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants and patriots.
Hehe, that's what Jim Caviziel says to Denzel in 'Deja Vu' (almost exactly) when justifying the killing of 400 people.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 4:01pm

Post 49 of 91

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

black ronin1228 wrote:

I keep one of the many in my house unlocked whilst I'm there as an easy opportunity to utilize should someone feel the need to break into my house and try to take something of mine, including my life.
Wow, I'm really rather glad I live somewhere where I don't even have to consider such things! Sounds like a scary place.

Anyway, interesting discussion, particularly the WW2 bit - always a touchy subject, so good to see it handled with aplomb and insight by almost everyone. smile
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 4:47pm

Post 50 of 91

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Rating: +1

studies have shown our oil here could last 50,0000 years.
Studies have also shown that 50,0000 isn't a real number.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 6:09pm

Post 51 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

CX3 wrote:

studies have shown our oil here could last 50,0000 years.
Studies have also shown that 50,0000 isn't a real number.
Charitably, I've assumed this to be a typo of 500,000, or possibly even of 50,000. Either way, it seems so out-of-line with every other figure I've seen, I'd love to see where it comes from. I am amazed that the people of America would be buying such expensive oil from regimes they don't like if they have so much oil they can run the whole of the USA for 1500+ generations. Surely all the good and right-thinking American people would overthrow their governement for such an action?

I hope it's not a figure made up to try to win an argument - that would discredit everything else said if it can't be substantiated.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 6:53pm

Post 52 of 91

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

50,000 years? You've gotta be f*cking kidding me.

Economists put it somewhere at 50 years, give or take. I don't know how you could've got the numbers more wrong.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 10:04pm

Post 53 of 91

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

CX3 wrote:

studies have shown our oil here could last 50,0000 years.
Studies have also shown that 50,0000 isn't a real number.
I've already decided that I'm staying out of this debate, but that made me laugh really hard.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 10:17pm

Post 54 of 91

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:



As for you, Rawree, I got a little turned around in what I was saying as far as isolationism. I meant we ineffectively did it to try and prevent another WW1.
Not that I'm wanting to try and discredit everything you say but there is a very popular theory among historians that America (by which I mainly mean Roosevelt and the executive branch) had no intention of persuing an isolationist policy. To go a bit further there's evidence that after WW2 began, rather than trying to stay out of it and prevent it becoming another WW1, Roosevelt tried extremely hard to become involved in the conflict and took actions which could be seen as a way of deliberately antagonising the Japanese and encouraging hostility - most would agree that Pearl Harbour or anything on that scale wasn't intended, expected or assisted by the government but there is enough evidence to suggest that FDR wanted to provoke some kind of action that would convince congress and the American public that involvement in the war was necessary.
Posted: Sun, 19th Aug 2007, 10:29pm

Post 55 of 91

Penguin

Force: 852 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 560

EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

If it were up to me I would seal the Border, deport every Non american, and withdraw every single American soldier from everyplace! [...] We could do without you,china, france and so on.....could they say the same?
wall


This is the same kind of mentality that causes genocides. We need the rest of the world, and they need us; that's just how it works.

Last edited Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 4:37pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 12:13am

Post 56 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

If it were up to me I would seal the Border, deport every Non american, and withdraw every single American soldier from everyplace! [...] We could do without you,china, france and so on.....could they say the same?
So you'll be giving it back to the indians then?
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 4:43am

Post 57 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Ridiculous...much?
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 5:25am

Post 58 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

[quote="Atom"]
Ahhhh........the good old 'asshole' mentality. Good luck living life with that. smile
The good old "asshole" mentality is what helps me get through my daily life...it's a mentality that is learned, because of the attitudes of those around me...concurrently, you being one of the few new ones to add to my list of trainers...so thank yourself, I have a wonderful life and can live with it...the whole "Not caring about your opinion in the first place" attitude I have, fine with me.

Atom wrote:

So.......expecting a good number of people to break into your house all at once from different areas to justify having numerous firearms for 'self defense'? Just wondering, as I know probably the maximum number of guns you could fire at once is 2 for self-defense, and only if the situation opened itself up. Why in the world would you need more than that? And it's okay if you just like guns (we all love them in movies! smile), but don't try and spin 'self-defense' my way if you have more than 2 in a single building/home.
I'm not trying to spin self-defense into YOUR way Atom, since the last missive wasn't titled or addressed to you in any way, but as with all freedoms, you're allowed to exercise them as you see fit, and add your nonsense comments about how many guns YOU think I need to have in my house, or trying to espouse to me about WHY I would need, or SHOULDN'T HAVE so many. What you think, and how you think I should live doesn't concern me in the least. I'm free to do what I want, and that's what I'm doing. Don't like it?, go pound salt, mind your own P's and Q's, because either way, I don't care what you think......oh yeah, did I fail to mention, I don't care what you think?

Atom wrote:

Hehe, that's what Jim Caviziel says to Denzel in 'Deja Vu' (almost exactly) when justifying the killing of 400 people.
Jim Caviezel was merely playing the part of a psychopath murderer who thought that by killing all those innocent people was going to make a difference. But again, we know how Hollywood over exaggerates everything to amplify the fear and loathing they want you to feel towards Jim Caviezels' Character. That is what this thread started out as, me making a simple comment about the realism factor of a silenced firearm in movies, versus a personal attack on my doctrine. If I wanted that, I'd stick to the hundreds of news groups I'm involved with, and the local liberal democrats who think that what they think is good for me is more important that what I know is good for me.

It never occurred to you to look up who else made that quote, before you opened your mouth and inserted foot, did it? Just in case you're wondering, it was also Thomas Jefferson, you know, one of the founding fathers of this country! One of the signers of the the Constitution of the United States, which you live in, and a framer of the Declaration of Independence, those two seemingly insignificant little pieces of paper that have simultaneously given YOU the right to come to this web page and DECLARE that I'm an asshole...yeah, that's the guy.

Perhaps it's time you opened a book and did a little history research to see just how you got the rights you have, and have the right to fight to keep them. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is for everyone, not just the criminal who has a trunk load of firearms, but the law abiding one who wants more than one gun in the house because he or she has other people in the house that he or she loves and wants them to be able to defend themselves as well should any one of the others be incapacitated in any way.

I live in a nice place, but I'm a pessimistic realist, constitutionalist libertarian, and oh yeah, did I fail to mention, I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINION?

My parents, priest, military commander, and Sensei all taught me one thing, plan for the worst, but hope for the best. Pretty simple philosophy. Live life like a Samurai. Believe you are already dead, and you will fear nothing. I don't fear for myself, I fear for others. That's something I am also working on. Letting go of what I fear to lose the most.

What are you doing to make a better world?

Mahatma Ghandi once said, "Be the change you want to see in the world".

Are you being the change you want to see?

Oh yeah, and did I fail to mention again, I don't care what you think anyway, so post away, bash away, I'm enjoying this.

T
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 5:49am

Post 59 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Wow, I'm really rather glad I live somewhere where I don't even have to consider such things! Sounds like a scary place.

Anyway, interesting discussion, particularly the WW2 bit - always a touchy subject, so good to see it handled with aplomb and insight by almost everyone. smile
Dear Tarn, I do live in a rather nice neighborhood, but lately it's becoming like New York City 2. There is a sharp increase in home break ins', as well as a larger grouping of gangs coming up from New York City. And all that goes with it...drugs.

I remember back when I was like 10 or 15 years old and wouldn't hear about a murder in our local area (within 200 miles of where I live) but once every year, if even that much. Now, it's like every week or two there is something going on gang related, shootings, home robberies, and murders. If you watched one of the 48 Hours Episodes, one not too long ago was about a guy named Cal Harris. Look his story up. And he was an upstanding member of one of the nearby communities to my own.

I even stopped a grand theft auto situation unfolding at 4am in my neighbors driveway last year. I was sitting in my front living room watching TV with the woman all asleep, and me not far behind when out of the corner of my eye I saw out the window two men running crouched through my front yard at an angle towards the neighbors house up the road. I slid out of the chair across the floor, turned off the TV to see more clearly and to not have the back light of the TV give away the fact that there was anyone watching them at all.

When I saw them head next door, I grabbed two radios, threw one on with my throat mic and headset so when the wife called me back they wouldn't hear a thing, and so I could whisper and she would hear me perfect. I then put on my Ghillie suit quickly, grabbed my SKS with a 40 round clip, my elCheapo version of a night vision goggle to wear on my head and woke the woman up and told her to call 911. She did, let them know the information I was feeding her through the radio, and I proceeded around the neighbors house slowly towards where I heard their voices.

I rounded a very dark corner to look between the neighbors house and garage and saw the two men trying to jimmy the lock on the truck door my neighbor had for sale. I told the wife what to tell the police, pulled back into the garage/house alcove and waited for the police.

I asked the wife repeatedly to make sure the responding officer(s) knew I was there, was armed, and not to shoot the guy with a long rifle. A police car pulled up the street, turned on his spotlight right on me, I hand signaled him that I had seen two males, and their location both by hand and directly over the phone via the walkie and he shut his light off, went quietly around the neighbors garage with his lights off and he parked and surprised the two men. They both took off running right towards me until they realized the huge spotlight on them was from a nice long ass rifle pointed their way. I told them both to freeze, and they did. He arrested them both, and then the police started to ask me all sorts of questions about me, my gun, my gear, where they could get similar gear. I invited the ones that actually showed up in for a cup of coffee. We chit chatted, went to the station to fill out a report, and that was that.

That's my local crime world in a nutshell, so yeah, even though you guys over in the UK have to jump through way more hoops than we'll ever have to over here, I give you props for putting up with it the way things are made for you by your government, and if you have to jump through that many hoops, I'd do it. From the look of things in California, and the kind of anti-gun legislation they've been passing over the last 15 years, we aren't too many decades behind you, but until then, I'm keeping mine, and even then!....

T
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 7:23am

Post 60 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

black ronin1228 wrote:


The good old "asshole" mentality is what helps me get through my daily life...it's a mentality that is learned, because of the attitudes of those around me...
You must be having delusions of grandeur to think that you're some 'right' person in a world of 'wrong' to justify your attitude. I seriously question your "wonderful life" based on your apparent paranoia and ridiculous assumptions and disgraceful accusations about society. Seriously.

......oh yeah, did I fail to mention, I don't care what you think?
Ah, a closed-mind statement. That'll get you real far in life. smile If you don't care, then what is the point of retaliating/responding? I can accept the fact that you're being an arrogant, misinformed, an irrational person on here- just don't try and turn things to "well, I lost the argument....but I didn't care in the first place...so HA!". If you don't have the courtesy to respect/listen to others' opinions: get the hell out.

Atom wrote:

Hehe, that's what Jim Caviziel says to Denzel in 'Deja Vu' (almost exactly) when justifying the killing of 400 people.
It never occurred to you to look up who else made that quote, before you opened your mouth and inserted foot, did it? Just in case you're wondering, it was also Thomas Jefferson, you know, one of the founding fathers of this country!
Once again, you look like an ass. Of course I knew who it was, Thomas Jefferson is one of my most adored lifetime heroes. I put that up there to try and relate you to how bloated and wildly unjustified your comment was- no more valid than......well........some fictional writing.

Perhaps it's time you opened a book and did a little history research to see just how you got the rights you have, and have the right to fight to keep them.
Ahhh, the good old 'ad hominem' attack. I hope it works out for you. wink Even for my age, I'd say I'm fairly well-versed in my nations progress, history, etc. I'm a U.S. history buff....but whatever. I probably need to read more books, as I haven't yet picked up on all this eye-opening literature you've apparently been reading. wink

did I fail to mention, I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINION?
Oh, once more? Really? Just in case I missed it and didn't stop reading the first time? Thanks. smile

What are you doing to make a better world?
Ahhh, another ad hominem. Can't wait for more repetition! Wait....


Are you being the change you want to see?
Bingo! Oh, and I might not be the change I want to see, but certainly you can be for me. I don't want to see more weapons of death in personal homes. Would you mind throwing yours out for me? smile

Oh yeah, and did I fail to mention again, I don't care what you think anyway, so post away, bash away, I'm enjoying this.
Oh, so three times was the charm, then? Thank god you're so much smarter than me and delighting in this. For a second there, I got worried I wasn't going to be the ludicrously-opinioned, close-minded fool.

And just in case I didn't put enough smilies....smile.

But wait! You double-posted! Yipee!

black ronin1228 wrote:

Tarn wrote:

Wow, I'm really rather glad I live somewhere where I don't even have to consider such things! Sounds like a scary place.

Anyway, interesting discussion, particularly the WW2 bit - always a touchy subject, so good to see it handled with aplomb and insight by almost everyone. smile
Dear Tarn, I do live in a rather nice neighborhood, but lately it's becoming like New York City 2. There is a sharp increase in home break ins', as well as a larger grouping of gangs coming up from New York City....blah blah

T
FYI, just to down your credibility a little bit. I live in one of the largest crime epicenters of the U.S., Oak Cliff, Dallas, TX. Lee Harvey Oswald himself lived a few blocks down from me and Bonnie and Clyde themselves met here. And how do I feel? I have never in any way felt the need, nor have my neighbors, to buy a weapon for 'self-defense'. You can call me stupid for not owning a weapon all you want, but it's just not necessary or worth the risk. Sure, sometimes things can get scary, but I'm much more content than I would be worrying about my sister getting ahold of a 'pow-pow-death-shooter' (wink) in my house at 4am than anything else.

And just in case you want to lower my credibility some, check out some of the shirts they make for my area:
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 7:55am

Post 61 of 91

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Before I start, I want to say I live in Oak Cliff, the ninth biggest violent crime district in the urban United States. That's in Texas, if you cared. I fear this may discredit to an extent a few of the things Atom just said, but here goes...

black ronin1228 wrote:

I even stopped a grand theft auto situation unfolding at 4am in my neighbors driveway last year.
This might've helped in your scenario, but I have concrete proof it didn't in mine. My neighborhood has experienced a huge crime surge lately (HUGE out of the 18 years I've been here) and stuff has been happening. But I'll get to that in a minute.

It was 4am, just like in your scene. A huge Mexican guy and a friend of his were outside my house, on the street, breaking the lock cylinder on my car door. I have a smartkey that sends a steel pin through the steering column if the door doesn't open by voluntary means, so once they broke the lock, they didn't get in.

Instead, they went and got a truck, hooked up a trailer, and proceeded to steal whatever they could from my neighbors' lawn people (who had parked their lawn trailer under lock and key on the street). My mom, who was watching HBO in the living room, heard the truck pulling up, and when she looked out she could tell the guy was suspicious (not to engage a stereotype, but most people thought a portly Mexican man was just the usual suspect for picking up his forgotten lawn equipment, so few people noticed this as crime; those that were up, at least) so she called my dad quietly into the room, and he picked up the phone, Louisville slugger in hand (which is just as good for wounding/threatening/killing an unarmed opponent, might I add), and called the cops.

Though the police came within 3 minutes, before that, my neighbor across the street, this badass hispanic guy Navarro (who, being of that ethnicity, didn't accept the guy playing into the stereotype and realized the lawn stuff wasn't the thief's) promptly walked outside and announced he had grabbed his 'piece'.

As Navarro walked out, other neighbors followed suit and we all enroached within 50 feet of the thief. As the cops pulled onto the block, the guy abandoned his crude attempt at hitching the trailer of stolen goods, and quickly broke into a car (neglecting the truck he pulled up with, which had a screwdriver jammed into the ignition and had been stolen a day earlier) and sped off, fearful of getting caught.

Well, by now we thought the crime was over. The cops had come, Navarro had had his gun out, the whole shebang. And not once did the criminal display a weapon. Problem solved, right? Wrong.

Fast forward to two days later, 3pm. The same lawn people who almost got ripped off are working on the house of the corner. It's late June, so most people on my block are on vacation or otherwise. Anyhow, the lawn guys are working three doors down from my house and around the block (adjacent to my house, backyard-wise) when a white Impala pulls up, the same fat Mexican guy gets out, and draws a gun on the lawn guys. That's right, this time he had a gun. I guess Navarro, if anything, taught him he better bring the big stuff if he wants to rob in our neighborhood.

Well I'll let you guess how the story ended. Did the lawn guys get robbed? Yeah. Did anybody stand up to the thief? Yeah, someone did. And guess what? He got shot and died.

Wanna take a good guess at what happened amongst the next three days? The same armed guy robbed EVERYTHING of my next-door neighbors, including their cell phones, which he would have no use for but to piss them off. He had a gun when he did that, by the way. He tried to break into my house, but thank God I've got a dog who barks loudly and a father who'll beat the sh!t out of someone with a bat if they try to rob us, so the guy got lost.

He turned up a couple of days ago, and when I went to go see what the racket was, I saw Navarro chasing the guy away, holding something. It was dark, but when I walked across the street after the guy had run off, Navarro returned and explained to me that he 'went upstairs to grab my piece, sure scared that f*cker away'. So yeah, the gun helped in that instance. But, in coming into the scenario in the first place, it consequently caused more crime (robber using gun has more power to steal) and cost one person their life.

So I'm all for protecting oneself. But I think baseball bats are better. They're lethal, by all means, and more widely sold, and thieves are less apt to pull out any firearms they may have if they see you only have a bat. It implies you haven't yet 'upped the ante' as it were, but you're still equipped to incapacitate your opponent. If you own a gun for fear of not a criminal but a government reprisal, then I'm sorry to tell you: a gun won't stop the government's power.

Still, I'm not against gun: I think they're cool, and, like you said, that they are fine, mechanical pieces of art that can be admired- and used- whether for target practice or game-sport but I think owning more than one (at least, more than one of a variation. I can understand owning a snubnose revolver and a shotgun) is a little overkill if you're claiming self-defense.

I want to commend you, blackronin, for unwaveringly standing up for your beliefs in a thread full of pessimism towards the ideal you espouse- but I think much of your strong-willed comments aren't doing you any favors in way of conveying your point. You can have an argument, and that's fine; but by immediately dismissing even the proposition of the opinions of other you're inherently stating that you're not willing to even begin to accept anyone else's ideas but you're own.

Drive your point harder if you must, but be clear in your purpose. Insulting people and dragging red herrings and ad-hominem attacks all over the place serves no purpose, except for to possibly function as a means of discrediting yourself.

Last edited Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 8:01am; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 7:58am

Post 62 of 91

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I love how this thread basicly started off this sentence.

black ronin1228 wrote:

(condolences go out to all the people whom live in countries where it's illegal to privately own one anymore).
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 4:30pm

Post 63 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

RETRACTION: I did make a mistake The oild would last 50 years if we used only the reserves we have, and current wells. We(USA) have not even tapped the Areas(MOST) in Alaska. If we did then Yes we could go a very long time without OPEC. Why do we go elsewhere for it? Good question. My Goverment may not be perfect, but becuase We have a Bill of rights we have the ability to change it. The 2Nd amendment insures that.
As for sealing the Borders....Well I Think every nation should.Not just the USA. GEnocide? Thats Crap! I didnt say round up the Non Americans and shoot them. Just deport them!
I am 1/4 American Indian,and I must say what happend to the Native Americans should support my argument for stronger imagration laws!
As for the U.S.A rushing to aid the world..well I was not thinking of WW1/or 2. as much as I was refering to the Humanitarian aid we supply. face it. If we(USA) pulled out of the United nations it wouldnt be long until it (UN) folded up.
As for "My pun y handgun defeating a TANK!" How long do you think a Tank runs on a tank of fuel? How long does the crew have until there is No water or food? How about the Mechanics and the other support personel? Yes...our(USA) puny hand guns could knock out a tank. LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 4:49pm

Post 64 of 91

cdolsen

Force: 710 | Joined: 16th Jun 2002 | Posts: 206

EffectsLab Lite User

Gold Member

hey azgunrunner - as of 1996 no treaty has been fully honored. makes me 'real proud' to be white
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 4:52pm

Post 65 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

As for "My pun y handgun defeating a TANK!" How long do you think a Tank runs on a tank of fuel? How long does the crew have until there is No water or food? How about the Mechanics and the other support personel? Yes...our(USA) puny hand guns could knock out a tank.
There are a whole ton of holes to pick in that, you are living in a little dream world if you truely beleive what you are saying.

LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
And its this complacency which has been every empire's downfall throughout history.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 5:14pm

Post 66 of 91

Penguin

Force: 852 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 560

EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

As for sealing the Borders....Well I Think every nation should.Not just the USA. GEnocide? Thats Crap! I didnt say round up the Non Americans and shoot them. Just deport them!
I know what you said, and that you personally said nothing about rounding them up and shooting them. I just meant that your arrogant and superior attitude toward other countries is the same kind of thing that sets the stage for a genocide.

AzGunrunner wrote:

As for "My pun y handgun defeating a TANK!" How long do you think a Tank runs on a tank of fuel? How long does the crew have until there is No water or food? How about the Mechanics and the other support personel? Yes...our(USA) puny hand guns could knock out a tank. LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
This statement makes no sense at all.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 6:09pm

Post 67 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

AzGunner, man, you're making your country and it's defending inhabitants on these forums look bad, misinformed, and arrogant by your action and words.

And frankly, it isn't fair to anyone. That, and you sound like a complete idiot. smile
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 6:15pm

Post 68 of 91

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

RETRACTION: I did make a mistake The oild would last 50 years if we used only the reserves we have, and current wells. We(USA) have not even tapped the Areas(MOST) in Alaska. If we did then Yes we could go a very long time without OPEC.
As I've previously mentioned, economists predict that Middle-Eastern Oil will be exhausted within 50 years, some even say 20 years. Figuring the former, let's add to that how long we've been using foreign oil, which is roughly 50 years.

So basically, if you add two and two together, Middle-Eastern oil can only sustain the human race in total for 100 years, give or take. Now I want you to think about this:

Studies show that approximately 88% of the world's entire oil supply rests there. The other 12% is dispersed throughout the globe, with about 8-9% of that residing in Alaska and the continental United States.

I'll let you do the math. .09 x 100 years. We could sustain the entire US population's oil needs- at the rate we're going, at least- for only about 9 years.

So, realistically, we've got 60 years, maximum. If we tighten usage and incur rationing, then maybe 80 years. Get your facts straight next time you feel like arguing something.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 6:19pm

Post 69 of 91

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Where'd you get those facts?
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 6:44pm

Post 70 of 91

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

AzGunrunner wrote:

Many many things
I have to say AzGunrunner that pretty much everything you say either contradicts everything else you say or is just complete patriotic durge. For example you illustrate how any other nation ever staging an effective invasion of the USA is impossible; presumably because of the strength of the military that protects you night and day from any would be invaders. You also maintain that if the citizens of the USA ever felt compelled to start a revolution that the same military would have no chance of besting these citizens despite being able to repel the might of the world up to that point. This brings me to my next point: wars are not fought in the same way as when the Second Amendment was written and the only reason why this fantastically outdated piece of legislation still remains is because people like you still believe in the fantasy that if the government or a hostile nation threatened you it would be easy enough to repel them with the kinds of weapons that you could purchase. If the Russians one day decided for whatever bizare reason they didn't want America to exist anymore there's nothing that you or your 9mm could do about it. Similarly, as history has proven, there's no way in hell that the US government could be overthrown without the support of the military and if the military are in on the revolution then again the shotgun in your wardrobe won't really contribute much.

I'm all for freedom but when there are people who are clearly this deluded about such important issues it really makes me wonder...

Oh and the reason I thought you were talking about the First and Second World wars is because of your comment about how the French and British would be speaking German if it wasn't for your wonderfully tooled up country.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 7:31pm

Post 71 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rawree wrote:

Oh and the reason I thought you were talking about the First and Second World wars is because of your comment about how the French and British would be speaking German if it wasn't for your wonderfully tooled up country.
While I know you're just trying to dissolve AzGunner's ridiculous words, let's not (as we both said before) try and minimize the efforts of any of the allies in the World Wars.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 7:37pm

Post 72 of 91

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Frosty G wrote:

Where'd you get those facts?
Just some stuff I remember from some economics research I did about a year ago. Those figures are rough, but pretty close to the truth. It's also just economists predictions, which aren't concrete; but they're the best determinant we have, so why not go with them?

I also want to say this my stats come from some fact-finding about usable oil, as in economically and legally viable. Private, unaccessible oil wells are not included. The stats have changed drastically over the years, so I dunno if my stuff is still correct, but the 60 years bit is pretty correct.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 8:09pm

Post 73 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

WOW...If I sounded like a Boob Then I guess I am. Our Army is sworn to protect OUR constitution. Not the country or the Goverment. Im Not a Radical, Gun toting Red neck. I dont think that the USA is the end all be all. You should be proud of where ever you are from. I dont dislike English folks .or French people or Jewish people, or anyone for that matter. I dont care if you come and visit. C'mon over. Take a look around see what and how we do things.Just dont expect me to invite you to stay. We would love to show you the town(So to speak) George W. Doesnt speak for everyone of us, He sure doesnt speak for me. I support YOU, and YOUR right to say and do what ever you want.....So long as it doesnt infringe on me to do like wise. We(USA) over all have given a lot to the world, and in some way we have even exploited our power. You guys are getting personal, call me/ and others names becuase we exspress our thoughts, and values.....Why is that? Just dissagree. As for A 9m taking out a tank..Let me clear that up. IT will NOT! But small arms could deplete the means it takes to keep (ask the russians who fought in Afganistan) an army supplied. I do not condone the overthrow of our Goverment. I dont sit around waiting to take up arms against real,or imagined invaders, or criminals. I am not worried in the least about running out of oil.( We could make usable oil/fuel from recycled Tires, trash and Hemp oil just like The germans were doing in WW2) I dont care where you are from we all face the same problems, we all tend to complain about our Goverment..SO WHAT! I did not intend to piss in anyones fish and chips. Hope you guys can just be cool, I hold no animosity towards anyone. As Rodney King would say,"Ouch ouch ouch!..LOL nO really "cant we just get along?"
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 9:41pm

Post 74 of 91

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

And what a thread it's been...we've had the whole of world politics in microcosm here, and all seen a lot of opinions we don't agree with, but I hope we've all listened to those opinions without judgement too. All of life is a grey area, the older you get, the more you appreciate it - that's why we should have a teenage prime minister - 'cos at 18 you know everything!

As for the 50,000 years thing, good man, made a mistake, realised and corrected it. We've had other unsubstantiated claims on this thread though, I only picked out the 50,000 years one as an example to try to make a bigger point about citing references - don't believe everything you're told, no matter whether on a forum or by your elected government or whoever! Statistics are used as powerful tools to try to change opinions, so learn how statistics work and question them. They may be bang-on, they may be highly selective, they usually only tell a part of the story, and should never be taken as absolute truth. Indeed, what *is* absolute truth (The world was absolutely flat - until it wasn't, etc)?

Without question the USA has done some great things in this world, and likewise some truly dreadful ones. So have I, so have you, so has everyone. I love so many things about the US, especially the people and the sense of possibility. Sometimes in Europe we're held back by our sense of history (there are houses in my town way older than 'America' (I mean white settled America, of course), but sometimes it gives us a sense of perspective, a weary reserve to the youthful teenage excesses of America (and Australia to a degree). It discourages short-term thinking in a subtle but ever-present way - you're always reminded of a long history at every turn. One we largely share, actually, and I invite as many American visitors to visit our cramped and expensive little island as I can, most find a deep resonance.

I don't know if this thread will go on much longer, I've enjoyed it, but we can't get personal. I've learned, reconsidered some views, and moved on, I thank all the threads participants for a great read, and appreciate the mods not panicking to lock the thread.

Brothers and sisters, may we all sleep peacefully and without fear tonight and every night smile
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 9:51pm

Post 75 of 91

black ronin1228

Force: 1492 | Joined: 24th May 2007 | Posts: 38

VisionLab User

Gold Member

You know what Atom, I guess you're right. I am an asshole. I think I'll change the last 37 years of my life and maturity and growth amongst my fellow man and my mindset about humanity all together. Heaven knows you paint a beautiful picture of how the world would be if everyone got rid of their guns. A nice little Utopia would abound the world over and mankind would finally for once live amongst each other without borders, without sin, without crime or corruption.

In the dictionary under inspiration, there should be a picture of you, your name, address and everything about you and your life so that people have an image by which they can base their moral high ground on.

God knows, you've been an inspiration to me.

Thank you very much.

T
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 10:35pm

Post 76 of 91

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Really? After all this you still want to go on?

Right now, I believe, you're fighting for a lost cause.
Posted: Mon, 20th Aug 2007, 11:16pm

Post 77 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

black ronin1228 wrote:

You know what Atom, I guess you're right. I am an asshole. I think I'll change the last 37 years of my life and maturity and growth amongst my fellow man and my mindset about humanity all together. Heaven knows you paint a beautiful picture of how the world would be if everyone got rid of their guns. A nice little Utopia would abound the world over and mankind would finally for once live amongst each other without borders, without sin, without crime or corruption.

In the dictionary under inspiration, there should be a picture of you, your name, address and everything about you and your life so that people have an image by which they can base their moral high ground on.

God knows, you've been an inspiration to me.

Thank you very much.

T
Mr. Ronin, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 3:14am

Post 78 of 91

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

Mr. Ronin, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
You and your movie quotes, I swear.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 6:36am

Post 79 of 91

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

black ronin1228 wrote:

You know what Atom, I guess you're right. I am an asshole. I think I'll change the last 37 years of my life and maturity and growth amongst my fellow man and my mindset about humanity all together. Heaven knows you paint a beautiful picture of how the world would be if everyone got rid of their guns. A nice little Utopia would abound the world over and mankind would finally for once live amongst each other without borders, without sin, without crime or corruption.

In the dictionary under inspiration, there should be a picture of you, your name, address and everything about you and your life so that people have an image by which they can base their moral high ground on.

God knows, you've been an inspiration to me.

Thank you very much.

T
Mr. Ronin, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Yea, the correct response to Ronin would have been, "Your welcome".
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 7:24am

Post 80 of 91

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The day he wins is the day freedom dies.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 7:24am

Post 81 of 91

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

AzGunrunner wrote:

LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
Are...wait..are you kidding? Russia? China? Japan? India?


America would get their ass handed to them in a fight with any of the above.


Hell... even North korea could turn us into a smoking crater within a week...


(Also, the only guys that could fight a modern main battle tank with a handgun with proper tactics are maybe some Top-level Mossad, SAS or Navy Seals. Maybe.)
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 8:33am

Post 82 of 91

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

CX3 wrote:

Yea, the correct response to Ronin would have been, "Your welcome".
Or "I thought you didn't care?" smile

As PDRG says, interesting topic, let's try to keep it civil, chaps.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 12:09pm

Post 83 of 91

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

CX3 wrote:

Yea, the correct response to Ronin would have been, "Your welcome".
Or "I thought you didn't care?" smile

Hahah or that
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 5:43pm

Post 84 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Bryce007 wrote:

AzGunrunner wrote:

LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
Are...wait..are you kidding? Russia? China? Japan? India?


America would get their ass handed to them in a fight with any of the above.


Hell... even North korea could turn us into a smoking crater within a week...


(Also, the only guys that could fight a modern main battle tank with a handgun with proper tactics are maybe some Top-level Mossad, SAS or Navy Seals. Maybe.)
I am not talking about a global exchange of Nucular weapons. IF that would happen there would be no winners. so The smoking crater remark is NUll and void.
Nuking us(USA) would defeat the purpose of attacking us (WANTING TO OCCUPY OUR COUNTRY)
I am speaking of a Land based Ground war. After our Navy & Air force reduced/ dissable a majority of the forces used in the Invasion then the remaining force would have to contend with:
(1) our Armed forces.
(2) 80 million well armed Americans as a Gorrila force. A good portion are in fact former members of the Armed forces themselves.
(3) keeping their Forces supplied with, food and ammo.

No, it wouldnt be an easy battle for Us(USA) to simply toss out the invaders.

For The record. I am no teenage kid, I am well in my 40's. I spent 12 years In the united states Army with the 2/75th Rangers.One of many of my "Military occupational skills"(MOS) was light anti-Tank infantry.
As for Taking out a Tank: I would bet a left testical that SAS,GSG9,MASSAD,Special Forces,Rangers, Spetznatz. COULD NOT dissable a Battle tank, or APC with a hand gun...period!

What I was refering to was:Tanks, trucks APC, airecraft all require Support crews, Food, water, fuel, Maintnance crews, and parts.
When the Personel who operate these poke out their head burst they would have just met one of the(or more) of the 80million armed American Gorilas. It would not be long before these tactics would rob the invaders of the will and moral to carry on the fight.

Tanks are not invincable. Tanks have limits, and when these limits are exploited they become varnerable. So NO a 9mm wont take out a T72, but it will take ot the crew, Mechanic, fuel truck driver, cooks, medics....

I do know that some well placed .50Cal can blind a tank, and dissable some of the systems enough to require asistance from external suport personel. One round of .50cal AP.API,APIT or God forbis a ROFO down the muzzle onto a loaded round of 120mm HE, or through and open breech block. well you figure it out.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 5:56pm

Post 85 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

A modern battle tank can have a range of 600 miles, that means fighting 200-300 miles from its support crews. Now assuming the tank doesn't have supporting vehicles, missile coverage and so on. What shape are you going to be in to fight well rested and trained soldiers carrying assault rifles and wearing body armour with your puny handgun after your 300 mile run?

Really I think all you need to do is look at the aftermath of katrina to see that America would in fact be pretty helpless if anything happened. Having firearms just means that you will kill more of each other before an invading force reached you.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 6:43pm

Post 86 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Kid wrote:

A modern battle tank can have a range of 600 miles, that means fighting 200-300 miles from its support crews. Now assuming the tank doesn't have supporting vehicles, missile coverage and so on. What shape are you going to be in to fight well rested and trained soldiers carrying assault rifles and wearing body armour with your puny handgun after your 300 mile run?

Really I think all you need to do is look at the aftermath of katrina to see that America would in fact be pretty helpless if anything happened. Having firearms just means that you will kill more of each other before an invading force reached you.
Katrina My Eye! Dude,What the %$#^ are you talking about "300Mile Run" That battle tank couldnt move 300 miles in any direction without having some oppositional force to deal with. Once it got there whos bringing it the fuel?,Ammo and so on. The entire 300 mile would have that tank, and its crew, and support personel under constant American fire. As it moved from one sector to another The Gorrilas wouldnt need to chace it. someone would already be there. take a lesson on Tactics. We do not live on a big flat island...we have natural land formations and so on that would bog down a portion of any armored assualt, and funnel others into such a cross fire that it would be a turkey shoot. I refuse to argue Battle tactics, and match witts with someone who is unarmed. No offence intended.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 6:49pm

Post 87 of 91

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Kid wrote:

A modern battle tank can have a range of 600 miles, that means fighting 200-300 miles from its support crews. Now assuming the tank doesn't have supporting vehicles, missile coverage and so on. What shape are you going to be in to fight well rested and trained soldiers carrying assault rifles and wearing body armour with your puny handgun after your 300 mile run?

Really I think all you need to do is look at the aftermath of katrina to see that America would in fact be pretty helpless if anything happened. Having firearms just means that you will kill more of each other before an invading force reached you.
Yea I was kinda stayin out of this as well but that really didn't make much sense... Like at all
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 7:03pm

Post 88 of 91

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Well my point was in the face of that natural disaster rather than pulling together and being heroes everyone went out for themselves. There were tailbacks on the roads out full of cars with only 1 person in despite leaving tons of people stranded behind. All the people who were left behind could do was sit and chant save us, save us rather than try and help each other. Those who made it to the superdome had to deal with rape and assult for supplies. Gangs went looting and it wasn't even safe for the police to go in to help people.

Now if all that happens when someone isn't out to get you then I don't see how in your wildest dreams this organised gorilla force that he keeps talking about wil come together.

As for the tank comment, seeing as you claim to be an expert in military tactics, you would know the concepts of beacheads and defensive perimiters layed out by bombardment. Also you would realise that the defending country couldn't do the same because you would be bombing your own people. Also you would realise that urban warfare is the US armys main weakness. Basically there is a big nomans land in the middle, the tanks drive over to you, shoot you up and then drive back to ressupply. Obviously they do this in rotation to hold a line and the support moves forward gradually. You dont get anywhere near it.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 8:53pm

Post 89 of 91

AzGunrunner

Force: 10 | Joined: 5th Jul 2007 | Posts: 52

Member

Kid wrote:

Well my point was in the face of that natural disaster rather than pulling together and being heroes everyone went out for themselves. There were tailbacks on the roads out full of cars with only 1 person in despite leaving tons of people stranded behind. All the people who were left behind could do was sit and chant save us, save us rather than try and help each other. Those who made it to the superdome had to deal with rape and assult for supplies. Gangs went looting and it wasn't even safe for the police to go in to help people.

Now if all that happens when someone isn't out to get you then I don't see how in your wildest dreams this organised gorilla force that he keeps talking about wil come together.

As for the tank comment, seeing as you claim to be an expert in military tactics, you would know the concepts of beacheads and defensive perimiters layed out by bombardment. Also you would realise that the defending country couldn't do the same because you would be bombing your own people. Also you would realise that urban warfare is the US armys main weakness. Basically there is a big nomans land in the middle, the tanks drive over to you, shoot you up and then drive back to ressupply. Obviously they do this in rotation to hold a line and the support moves forward gradually. You dont get anywhere near it.
I do not claim to be an expert, but that said I do beleive that i may have a bit more real world tactical knowledge than most I did a tour in the first Gulf war, and 16 months in Iraq, so there is very little you can teach me.Been there done that Got the T-Shirt! Now as for bombing a beach head. that would not be the first option. the first option would be to counter attack long before the force ever got close to our coast line. keep in mind we(USA) have ways of watching folks from a great distance(Look up and say cheese). So What ever forces made it to the beach would be few. The second thing would be to make getting their army Back to the beach as hard as possiable. Now as far as Urban warfare. well you are correct. house to house is rough going. But tanks are NOT suited for urban combat. Example: Lure a tank into an urban area, street alley what ever drop(TNT) a building on it, infront of it, or behind it (preferably both), then BURN it! it worked for the Taliban in the 1980's..tanks work best in an open feild of fire.
As for Katrina..Look dont let the actions of a bunch of ASSHOLES fool you. getting washed away is nothing like coming together to combat a common for bent on taking away your way of life, freedom, and liberty. I dont claim to be a history expert, But way back when Frenchy was messing with england was it not the commom man/boy with the feared LONG BOW that leveled the playing feild? Well My Automatic rifle is MY LONG BOW!. If I recall a famous Photo of Mr Churchhill he is holding up two fingers in a V most say for Victory...Is that not the same Gesture made in reference made by the Long bowman as a threat. (those fingers pull the bow string) Could he of in fact have been saying;"hey Adolf,Don't mess with us, or we will show you what we are made of"
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 9:04pm

Post 90 of 91

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Bryce007 wrote:

AzGunrunner wrote:

LIke I siad no army would stand a chance if they tried to invade us.
Are...wait..are you kidding? Russia? China? Japan? India?


America would get their ass handed to them in a fight with any of the above.


Hell... even North korea could turn us into a smoking crater within a week...


(Also, the only guys that could fight a modern main battle tank with a handgun with proper tactics are maybe some Top-level Mossad, SAS or Navy Seals. Maybe.)
Is this a joke? America has the most powerful military in the world. Thats why we are the hegemony. Our navy alone is bigger than the navys of the next 10 largest navys combined. We are one of the ony, if not the only now, countries who can completely obliterate a nation with nuclear weapons even if they striked us first. And we are protected by oceans on both our sides with strong allies above and below us.
Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 9:11pm

Post 91 of 91

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

AzGunrunner wrote:

If I recall a famous Photo of Mr Churchhill he is holding up two fingers in a V most say for Victory...Is that not the same Gesture made in reference made by the Long bowman as a threat. (those fingers pull the bow string) Could he of in fact have been saying;"hey Adolf,Don't mess with us, or we will show you what we are made of"
No, not at all actually. Though you're right that the gesture originated from the English Long Bow men of the middle ages it was used then (and now) as a provocative or insulting gesture. When churchill picked up the finger gesture it was meant simply as "Victory".

So someone stepped on your patriotism. I don't see that as an excuse to drag an otherwise moderately interesting... well no, not even interesting. This whole thing has gun fetishism and foolish bravado patriotica written all over it.

Now that all points have been made, it's time to leave it behind.

-Hybrid.