Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

 

Poll

Should using .50 Caliber weapons against humans be illegal

Yes21%21% - 81
No78%78% - 296
Total: 377
2006-06-19 10:30:39
thanks_champ
Member
+19|6526
I think people are missing the big picture. The goal should be non lethal munitions, that still have stopping power.   

In my opinion it's the only way the US will win this war. Imagine the intelligence that could have been gathered from Zarqawi if they had captured him alive? Imagine if the innocent victims of Haditha had not been killed, but simply temporarily disabled.

It changes everything.
2006-06-19 10:43:25
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US
I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.
2006-06-19 11:28:02
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|6810|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Ikarti wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read.
I rest my case.
2006-06-19 11:37:14
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read.
I rest my case.
oh you poor thing. How clever. So it's ok when people are spouting off how efficiently it kills Iraqis, but talk about it killing US troops it's off limits. How typical. The troops deserve every IED they get.
2006-06-19 11:50:01
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6648

Ikarti wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read.
I rest my case.
oh you poor thing. How clever. So it's ok when people are spouting off how efficiently it kills Iraqis, but talk about it killing US troops it's off limits. How typical. The troops deserve every IED they get.
we got a member of the phelps clan...LOL
2006-06-19 11:55:17
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6653

Smitty5613 wrote:

yerded wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

no conventional weapon should be illegal when it comes to war.
American "authorities", especially in California, want to ban 50 cal weapons because their behavior is such that they know they should get whacked, and 50 calibre weapons defeat all body armor.
i live in cali and some people out here are cra-z and want to ban all weapons... soon we will be as bad as england (where they are trying to ban steak-knives cuz the losers there got all tha guns banned and are bored)
Yes, but your quite obviously a fuckwit who doesn't understand anything about the banning of knives in the UK
2006-06-19 14:21:39
biff_24_2000
Member
+0|6545
hey Ikarti, you can go burn in hell with fred phelps.
2006-06-19 14:46:13
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US
See except Phelps believes in hell, I don't. I hate phelps for being a fucking fundamentalist dipshit. He hasn't killed any women and children to my knowledge though.
2006-06-19 15:11:12
biff_24_2000
Member
+0|6545
but he knows how to abusive them.
2006-06-19 15:16:01
11thdsv
Member
+3|6718|fort worth, tx.
its already against the geneva convention to use 12.7 mm ammo too target  troops but that doesn't mean you cant target the truck they are in!! oh and by the way a 7.62x39mm or even a 5.56mm will defeat body armor anything over  2200 fps is lethal to a person wearing body armor even if it doesnt penatrate the armor well you still die your just not blown to shit .your still in one piece your insides are jello but hey the armor worked!!

Last edited by 11thdsv (2006-06-19 15:23:22)

2006-06-19 15:18:50
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6710
They will both kill you with one shot.  Who cares?!  I would rather be killed by a .50cal than anything else.
2006-06-19 15:22:08
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6634|Washington, DC

Ikarti wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read.
I rest my case.
oh you poor thing. How clever. So it's ok when people are spouting off how efficiently it kills Iraqis, but talk about it killing US troops it's off limits. How typical. The troops deserve every IED they get.
Go fuck Zarqawi's rotting corpse you fucking sick monster. You should be deported to Iraq, prefferably in Fallujah with an "ALLAH SUCKS AMERICAN COCK" shirt.
2006-06-19 15:23:44
YahooGuy
Member
+0|6583
If carried and presented "in the open"--i.e. mounted on top of a 5-ton / 7-ton / HMMWV / tank / LAV / etc--using the .50 in retaliation to an engagement started by the opposition is allowed.  Why?   Because if you are presenting that weapon IN THE CLEAR, the enemy can see it, and is aware that those personnel manning those guns will use those guns to return fire.

In other words:

If you shoot your automatic AK-47 at me, I will shoot my automatic M2 .50 machine gun (or maybe my Mk-19 40mm grenade launcher!) back at you, as this is considered appropriate escalation of force.  Don't want to be shot by my .50?  Then don't start anything.
2006-06-19 16:34:43
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6648

Ikarti wrote:

See except Phelps believes in hell, I don't. I hate phelps for being a fucking fundamentalist dipshit. He hasn't killed any women and children to my knowledge though.
but your  argument holds just as much sway as theres.  great way of being taken seriously fuck wad.  Im proud to have served in a military that protects your right to ignorance.
2006-06-19 21:31:13
MorbidFetus
Member
+76|6555|Ohio
There's no nice way to shoot somebody.
2006-06-19 21:38:24
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|6574|Portland, OR, USA

Ikarti wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read.
I rest my case.
oh you poor thing. How clever. So it's ok when people are spouting off how efficiently it kills Iraqis, but talk about it killing US troops it's off limits. How typical. The troops deserve every IED they get.
holy shit, i've havent actually seen someone that radical (liberal) on these forums yet (maybe i just havent paid enough attention) anywho.. +1
2006-06-20 03:24:47
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US
Gunslinger, your army doesn't protect shit. How come you tough guys can't handle any criticism?
2006-06-20 04:59:48
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|6845|Cologne, Germany

Ikarti wrote:

Gunslinger, your army doesn't protect shit. How come you tough guys can't handle any criticism?
because, Ikarti, there is a difference between constructive criticism and what you do. what reaction do you expect from americans when you write things like

Ikarti wrote:

The troops deserve every IED they get.
?

You are free to critizise (sp?) all day long, but I'll ask you to mind your language.

Btw, this is also applies to all replies like this:

Executionerstyle wrote:

Go fuck Zarqawi's rotting corpse you fucking sick monster. You should be deported to Iraq, prefferably in Fallujah with an "ALLAH SUCKS AMERICAN COCK" shirt.
you might not agree with someone's statement here, but name-calling will generally not help in a serious discussion, will not help support your argument, and will most likely damage your own reputation, which in turn will lead to people not taking you seriously...

So, I'll ask everyone to keep a level head...

thanks,
B.

Last edited by B.Schuss (2006-06-20 05:10:58)

2006-06-20 08:54:01
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6634|Washington, DC

Sorry B.Schuss, I just have a low tolerance for scumbags like Ikarti.
2006-06-20 08:57:05
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6648
hes just an attention monkey.  his words dont piss me off, they are silly.
2006-06-20 08:58:54
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US
That's a great reaction. Find all the senseless killing done by our troops as "silly." Bet you came from the shallow end of the gene pool.
2006-06-20 09:00:56
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6634|Washington, DC

Are you that dumb that you think the troops WANTED to go over to Iraq?

General: SOLDIERS WE'RE GOING TO IRAQ! WATCH OUT FOR IED'S!
Soldiers: YIPPIEEE!!!!111

No. I'd place my money on the majority of the soldiers NOT wanting to have gone over to Iraq, much less having to kill people or watch their friends get ripped apart by IED's. Don't blame the messenger (the military), blame the sender (the government).
2006-06-20 09:03:25
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US

ExecutionerStyle wrote:

Are you that dumb that you think the troops WANTED to go over to Iraq?

General: SOLDIERS WE'RE GOING TO IRAQ! WATCH OUT FOR IED'S!
Soldiers: YIPPIEEE!!!!111

No. I'd place my money on the majority of the soldiers NOT wanting to have gone over to Iraq, much less having to kill people or watch their friends get ripped apart by IED's. Don't blame the messenger (the military), blame the sender (the government).
Hey, they signed up for it. They knew damn well what the military does, it doesn't matter who they get to kill. They seem to be having a blast over there, no pun intended.
2006-06-20 09:13:08
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|6810|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Ikarti wrote:

Bet you came from the shallow end of the gene pool.
Again, that's pretty funny coming from you Ikarti.

www.IKARTI.com

Last edited by Darth_Fleder (2006-06-20 09:30:26)

2006-06-20 09:14:39
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6713|Wilmington, DE, US

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

Bet you came from the shallow end of the gene pool.
Again, that's pretty funny coming from you Ikarti.

www.IKARTI.com
lame. try again.

 

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard