Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

To make it fair:

John has the Booleg Gun

Khan has a stun gun.

McClane barely survives, he's stunned, has multiple broken bones and cuts and blood all over his torn shirt, he's exhausted and has a cig sticking out the corner of his mouth. Khan lies dead at his feet.

Khan, easily.

Originally posted by Nuke Nixon
McClane barely survives, he's stunned, has multiple broken bones and cuts and blood all over his torn shirt, he's exhausted and has a cig sticking out the corner of his mouth. Khan lies dead at his feet.



Best post ever made.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Khan, easily.

Soooo, the Boolen gun enables Khan to defeat the likes of Superman and Yoda, but John MacClane having the same gun doesnt allow him to defeat Khan?

Originally posted by DTM
Soooo, the Boolen gun enables Khan to defeat the likes of Superman and Yoda, but John MacClane having the same gun doesnt allow him to defeat Khan? John isn't as accurate, as strong, or have any experience with the Boolean gun. It wasn't just the Boolean gun it was Khan wielding the Boolean gun. Don't get it twisted, sport.

Finally a match Khan will win.

Originally posted by DTM
Soooo, the Boolen gun enables Khan to defeat the likes of Superman and Yoda, but John MacClane having the same gun doesnt allow him to defeat Khan?

Lol, it's hilarious how he flips all the time like that because of his bias and complete lack of objectivity.

Originally posted by Robtard
Lol, it's hilarious how he flips all the time like that because of his bias and complete lack of objectivity. How did I flip ? Explain yourself, ese.

Khan curb stomps.

A bootleg vs Stun gun, you smoke crack on a daily basis?

Originally posted by quanchi112
John isn't as accurate, as strong, or have any experience with the Boolean gun. It wasn't just the Boolean gun it was Khan wielding the Boolean gun. Don't get it twisted, sport.

a boolean gun is a light weight weapon

Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
a boolean gun is a light weight weapon Prove it.

Seems you're not only ignorant of everything Star Trek prior to Abram's films, but ignorant of Abram's films as well. HYG:

"Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap."

Originally posted by Robtard
Seems you're not only ignorant of everything Star Trek prior to Abram's films, but ignorant of Abram's films as well. HYG:

"Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap."


I understand the Into Darkness novel is probably not relevant to this forum, but on that very same page...

In the novelization of Star Trek Into Darkness, the weapon was also not given a specific official name, but it was referred to as a power rifle. It was, according to the novel, designed to be mounted on a tripod and manipulated by two or more people. The fact that Khan could wield it with precision and as effortlessly as a light pistol was due to his strength and abilities as an augment.

Books don't count here, correct.

So because a guy who is a super soldier within the context of the movie wields it with one hand, John McClane can?

I think it's pretty clear it's not a lightweight weapon but whatever, I'm not much fussed.

If it helps you feel better about the "no books" rule, McClane has shown super-strength in times of need. McClane can also opt to use it with two-hands, for better accuracy.

I guess you missed the second part of the last sentence.

I didn't, I was trying to help you with your fuss, even if it isn't too much.

Originally posted by Robtard
Seems you're not only ignorant of everything Star Trek prior to Abram's films, but ignorant of Abram's films as well. HYG:

"Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap." We see it operated by a single hand whose hand was Khan's. He's the same guy whose hands crushed a human skull.

Show anyone else wielding it.

It's obvious when this cannon took someone out running at Khan it isn't lightweight. I mean FFS you're retarded.

We see Khan do a lot of things; we dont just assume they all require super-strength to do, that's being a silly fanboy. So show valid proof of your claims, that super-strength is required to fire a boolean gun. Show it like I did or concede again.

"Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shouldeR strap"

http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Boolean_gun

Dp

kmc is doing that thing where it dupes if you try and edit, maybe cos on a mobile

Thank raz

Originally posted by Robtard
We see Khan do a lot of things; we dont just assume they all require super-strength to do, that's being a silly fanboy. So show valid proof of your claims, that super-strength is required to fire a boolean gun. Show it like I did or concede again. We see the size of the cannon, the fact it's used via a strap, it took someone out and he discards it when he wants to go mobile. Khan has super strength so you can't ignore the only guy to use it and pretend anyone else can with the same ease and skill unless you prove it.

You also double post spammed. You're upset and massively retarded.

Originally posted by quanchi112
We see the size of the cannon, the fact it's used via a strap, it took someone out and he discards it when he wants to go mobile. Khan has super strength so you can't ignore the only guy to use it and pretend anyone else can with the same ease and skill unless you prove it.

You also double post spammed. You're upset and massively retarded.

Saying "Khan used it so it means the user must have super-strength" isn't a valid argument. Khan also used a rifle, that doesn't mean that only Khan can use that rifle as shown. Sorry, sporto.

I posted valid proof and sourced it: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap"

Either counter it with valid proof or concede, that's how debates work. Your flaming means you know you lost, it's a desperate distraction tactic of yours.

Valid proof > your unsupported fanboy claims.

Originally posted by Robtard
Saying "Khan used it so it means the user must have super-strength" isn't a valid argument. Khan also used a rifle, that doesn't mean that only Khan can use that rifle as shown. Sorry, sporto.

I posted valid proof and sourced it: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap"

Either counter it with valid proof or concede, that's how debates work. Your flaming means you know you lost, it's a desperate distraction tactic of yours.

Valid proof > your unsupported fanboy claims. I didn't cite that as the only reason. Khan went mobile with the rifle but he discarded the phaser cannon. Hint, nont.

That was someone's opinion watching the film because we only see Khan using it. I cited film knowledge and logic to come to the best choose.


I cited the film directly you cited someone else's opinion on the film not even your own. Think for yourself, scrub.

You didn't cite the film, you cited your own biased fanboy views on what you saw.

Your inability to show valid proof means you concede.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
You didn't cite the film, you cited your own biased fanboy views on what you saw.

Your inability to show valid proof means you concede.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. I cited facts from the film using logic. You cited someone else's wiki while ignoring the only guy who wielded the Boolean gun has super strength.

It was wielded by Khan.

We see him knock someone down with it and it didn't move lightning fast and knocked some Kling down for the count. That's a heavy weapon as simpleton can tell that but go quote someone else to argue for you. You're a joke.

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
HYG again:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Rage loop and this time it's even worse as Robbie is quoting another man to fight his battles since he can't think for himself.

"irony"

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
"irony"

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Rage loop but the opinion portion is by someone else who can form an opinion unlike you.

"irony"

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
"irony"

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Robbie again cites wiki and can't think his way out of a paper bag.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

The wiki is someone else's opinion. I already rebutted. You continue to rage loop.

Ask that other guy out on a date.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said facts isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Send the other guy here since you can't rebut and just rage loop.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said "facts" isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

The love in this thread makes me happy.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

HYG again, since you're just dancing and dodging:

Claiming you "cited facts" without posting proof to support said "facts" isn't a valid argument.

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. look here again.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Boom. I also fight my own battles unlike the cuck.

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Here is my argument once again.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Pm the wiki guy as your entire case rests on another man's opinion. Do you even know how wiki works ?

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. You must be really mad. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Think for yourself and please understand how wiki works for your own sake.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Here we go again.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Can someone else help out Roberta ? He thinks wiki is debating for him since he can't.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. You can use wiki but it's your whole argument and I've already rebutted it. Here.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Now think for yourself.

Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours. <--- keep dodging this

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Quan doesn't cite proof and still hasn't learned that using Wiki as support is in the MVF rules

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours. <--- keep dodging this

Until then, this destroys you:

You basically said: "Khan used the gun and he has super-strength, so that means super-strength is needed to use the gun". That's a faulty argument and little more than fanboy wanking.

Valid Proof: "Despite its size, the weapon could be operated with a single hand and was carried with a shoulder strap" -Sourced above.

Now either counter my valid proof with valid proof or be known as the one who concedes. Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

I responded. Another person editing wiki giving his interpretation means the world to you. I think for myself and don't need others to think for me.

You dodged and keep dodging, let's start with just one:

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Support your claim, don't dodge as you have been

Originally posted by Robtard
You dodged and keep dodging, let's start with just one:

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Support your claim, don't dodge as you have been Already covered.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

Shameful you think that a wiki entry from someone else is better than you formulating your own argument.

You dodged and keep dodging, let's start with just one:

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Support your claim, don't dodge as you have been

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The love in this thread makes me happy.
Put your boner away, weirdo

I like how thedkeffect's argument is basically, my biased opinion trumps your valid evidence source.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I like how thedkeffect's argument is basically, my biased opinion trumps your valid evidence source.

Would you expect any less, he has always made unsupported claims and then used said claim as proof when asked for proof.

Originally posted by Robtard
You dodged and keep dodging, let's start with just one:

"Bulkier" doesn't automatically mean something is heavy as you claimed. So that's another failed argument. Prove the gun is too heavy for someone like McClane to use. Post proof, or this is just another unsupported claim of yours.

Support your claim, don't dodge as you have been And again for the rage looper known as Roberta.


Originally posted by quanchi112
I said Khan used the gun and used it to take someone out. I said he tossed it aside as he went mobile. I said he had a shoulder strap which carried this heavier, bulkier weapon.


Someone else said the weapon could be operated with a single hand. Guess what the only person who did so had super strength.

Find the guy who edited that because you can't think for yourself and think a wiki entry based off a scene is evidence. At least he can think for himself while you quote another man to fight your battles once again.

I wish the Wiki editor knew you chose him as your brain.

Anyhow, I supported (page 1,2 and 3) my claim that McClane (who has both hands free) could use/fire the Boolean gun, all you've done is make unsupported claims and danced/dodged when asked to provide proof, as per the trolling MO you're well known for in KMC.

So McClane uses the vastly superior firepower and range the boolean gun provides him over Khan's stun-gun and shoots Khan dead. Now do your thing again.

Originally posted by Robtard
Anyhow, I supported (page 1,2 and 3) my claim that McClane (who has both hands free) could use/fire the Boolean gun, all you've done is make unsupported claims and danced/dodged when asked to provide proof, as per the trolling MO you're well known for in KMC.

So McClane uses the vastly superior firepower and range the boolean gun provides him over Khan's stun-gun and shoots Khan dead. Now do your thing again. Not with the accuracy or strength of Khan. You didn't support the gun is light and easy to use since Khan is the only one to use it and since he has super strength.

You cited wiki which is another person's take on the film as evidence this proving you can't debate for shit on your own.

Just as predicted, you did your thing.

Anyhow, my claim was: "McClane can use the Boolean gun, he even has both hands free here"

I used Wiki to support that, Wiki is allowed in here as per the MVF rules (read them). So once again you lost, have nothing and are trolling as per your usual MO. Now do your thing again.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just as predicted, you did your thing.

Anyhow, my claim was: "McClane can use the Boolean gun, he even has both hands free here"

I used Wiki to support that, Wiki is allowed in here as per the MVF rules (read them). So once again you lost, have nothing and are trolling as per your usual MO. Now do your thing again. I never said he can't use the gun I said he can't use it with the same skill and ease that Khan did.

Khan is faster and your article supports only Khan using it since he's the only one who wielded it. Another person edited the wiki and I'd rather talk to him as he can clearly form an argument but you can't.

More flips and now you're talking about some ridiculous conspiracy editing job against Abram's Khan. Grow up.

Originally posted by Robtard
More flips and now you're talking about some ridiculous conspiracy editing job against Abram's Khan. Grow up. Someone else edited it but that does t change the fact the only guy who wielded it had super strength. John isn't anywhere near as strong as Khan and isn't as accurate either. Khan wins, easily.

Khan gets Bolostomped

McClane wins... he always wins, unlike Khan

McClane goes absolutely mental and puts holes in khans broken body

nuff said

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Khan gets Bolostomped Based on ?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
McClane wins... he always wins, unlike Khan Based on ?

Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
McClane goes absolutely mental and puts holes in khans broken body

nuff said Khan wins, easily.

Subtract the last McClane movie, i would be arguing in his defense. Just because of the lastm Die hard movie, i'm arguing in Spite of him.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I like how thedkeffect's argument is basically, my biased opinion trumps your valid evidence source. ??

What is the environment they're fighting in?

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
What is the environment they're fighting in? Khan wins no matter the environment.