Codename 47 vs Bob Lee Swagger

Originally posted by Placidity
Um no. You still don't know what counter-intel is. Taking a picture of a no. plate is not counter-intel. When you keep insisting it is, it shows how ignorant and dumb you are.

No actually, substitute pistol=intel, crossbow=counter-intel, and its the same point I'm trying to get across to you. Yes, its quite a simple analogy, but it usually works on the simple-minded. Evidently, I overestimated your intelligence.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
OK then, you tell me. What rifle in the world can shoot 2.5 miles? Hmm?

You are very good at SAYING I am wrong, how's about you PROVE it? Yeah, thats a challenge. Bring it or STFU about it.

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/M107.html

This rifle, I don't think that 47 choosed to hit belikov directly in the nose region because it was me most challeging but because that was where the bullet had the greatest chance of entering.

Also yes the film zooms rapidly towards 47 but If I remember correctly so does it when Swagger shoots down the Cola, does that mean that there isn't a mile? We have no way to gauge ore meassure the distance we have to take what the characters in the movie says about the distance as a reliable source. And the source says four kilometers.

Originally posted by Utrigita
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/M107.html

This rifle, I don't think that 47 choosed to hit belikov directly in the nose region because it was me most challeging but because that was where the bullet had the greatest chance of entering.

Also yes the film zooms rapidly towards 47 but If I remember correctly so does it when Swagger shoots down the Cola, does that mean that there isn't a mile? We have no way to gauge ore meassure the distance we have to take what the characters in the movie says about the distance as a reliable source. And the source says four kilometers.

Here, look at this:

YouTube video

You can plainly see that 47's rifle is not the rifle in the link. Even the shell casing is alot smaller than a .50 cal.

As for the rifle in the link:

Maximum Range: 7450 yards (4.2 miles, 6.7 kilometers)

Maximum EFFECTIVE range: 2000 yards (1.2 miles, almost 2 kilometers)

So anything more than a mile and a half out, for any rifle, is pretty a shot that cannot be done.

Yeah, they zoomed in on the building 47 was in. I paused it right before they zoomed in, and no way that is over a mile. When Swagger shot that can of stew, he was actually shown doing the calculations, preparing for the shot, even talking to himself about it, then he did it.

In Hitman, the federal agent (Wasn't he the baddie in MI2, BTW?) is talking on his cell and he is going on what he heard, that the Russians reported Belokov was shot at 4 kilometers. That in itself is heresay. It's not like 47 was shown acknowledging the shot was 4 kilometers, or was told by someone "shoot this guy from 4 kilometers out."

Not to mention that a shot at that range has a six to seven flight time, and the bullet that killed the Russian only travelled like two seconds before hitting it's target.

Do you realize that you're coming off as a childish stupid ******* now? You vehemently cling to the "if it's in he movie, it counts" when it benefits Swagger (e.g. your counter-intel argument). But now you're nitpicking that Agent 47 couldn't make a 4km shot, even though it's clearly stated in the film. Double-standard galore.

So Swagger's only chance at winning would be doing what he's best at, a sniper shot. But Agent 47 clearly has him beat there. Deal with it.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I'll correct you when you are wrong, believe that shit. You said I changed using novel Luke, I never did so.

I already said that there is either advantage Swagger or advantage 47.

I agree with you on the last part.

You don't understand, see: http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f102/t481255.html you helped bring in novel Luke, yes, you did.

So why can't we have a fight where they don't have advantages? Why does everything have to be advantages with you? They can have a fair fight in Philly where they don't have to be at an advantage, and besides, looking back at all the gimping, hiding in park seems, well....dumb. Like it won't work. A place where you can't approach from either left, right, top or behind. Nah.

Okay then, so if we agree to disagree, why is there still talk coming then?

Originally posted by Robtard
Do you realize that you're coming off as a childish stupid ******* now? You vehemently cling to the "if it's in he movie, it counts" when it benefits Swagger (e.g. your counter-intel argument). But now you're nitpicking that Agent 47 couldn't make a 4km shot, even though it's clearly stated in the film. Double-standard galore.

So Swagger's only chance at winning would be doing what he's best at, a sniper shot. But Agent 47 clearly has him beat there. Deal with it.

There isn't a rifle in the world capable of a 4 km head shot, that's all I am saying. Think on it like this: 47 is a highly trained killer, going to snipe someone. I am willing to bet he knows ALL of his weapons inside and out, that he KNOWS their maximum effective range, right? You think he is going to take a shot with a sniper rifle when he knows the target is out of range?

I'm really not trying to come off like an ass, I just want you to be aware that the 4 km shot is not possible, and in the scene, when it shows where 47 is, that there is no way that is 4 km, it's maybe a mile or so.

Originally posted by Scythe
You don't understand, see: http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f102/t481255.html you helped bring in novel Luke, yes, you did.

So why can't we have a fight where they don't have advantages? Why does everything have to be advantages with you? They can have a fair fight in Philly where they don't have to be at an advantage, and besides, looking back at all the gimping, hiding in park seems, well....dumb. Like it won't work. A place where you can't approach from either left, right, top or behind. Nah.

Okay then, so if we agree to disagree, why is there still talk coming then?

And it was necessary in that thread, because ROTJ Luke versus Neo was a joke.

If you can present a scenario between Swagger and 47 where things are even, I welcome it. As it stands now, between these two, with their respective skills, it goes one way or the other in a landslide.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
See, the difference is that Swagger is shown doing counter intel, AND it is stated by a highly trained federal agent, someone also trained in counter intel.

There isn't a rifle in the world capable of a 4 km head shot, that's all I am saying. Think on it like this: 47 is a highly trained killer, going to snipe someone. I am willing to bet he knows ALL of his weapons inside and out, that he KNOWS their maximum effective range, right? You think he is going to take a shot with a sniper rifle when he knows the target is out of range?

I'm really not trying to come off like an ass, I just want you to be aware that the 4 km shot is not possible, and in the scene, when it shows where 47 is, that there is no way that is 4 km, it's maybe a mile or so.

And your bias is never ending:

A) Swagger takes a picture with his camera-phone, someone in the film says "it's counter-intel", it's counter-intel to you.

B) 47 takes a sniper shot, someone says "it's was over 4km away", it doesn't count.

As illogical as a rifle that can shoot over 4km is, "it's in the movie", which you argue counts for anything Swagger does; it's no more illogical than Swagger doing counter-intel by using a camera-phone on a license plate of a known government car.

So like I said before, your win depends on Swagger taking 47 out via sniper-shot to the dome, Agent 47 is clearly the better sniper of the two, a 4km shot is beyond extraordinary, then again, he's supposed to be the deadliest assassin in the world, so it fits. To deny this and use the double standards which you're using is factually being a dishonest *******.

Originally posted by Robtard
And your bias is never ending:

A) Swagger takes a picture with his camera-phone, someone in the film says "it's counter-intel", it's counter-intel to you.

B) 47 takes a sniper shot, someone says "it's was over 4km away", it doesn't count.

As illogical as a rifle that can shoot over 4km is, "it's in the movie", which you argue counts for anythign Swagger does; it's no more illogical than Swagger doing counter-intel by using a camera-phone on a license plate of a known government car.

There is a whole lot more going on in that scene than some guy taking a pic of someones plates. Go back and read where I explained it in great detail. Also, I was watching the movie at the theatre and there was some guy sitting next to me, and we got to talking during the coming attractions. When the scene took place, I was like "WTF that aint counter intel." Turns out the guy was a gulf war vet, an ex marine, and he broke it down for me, explained it to me. I didnt buy it at the time, but, after buying the DVD, I watched it over and over again, and I saw what he was talking about.

I am only saying 47 wasn't using a .50 cal rifle, and that even if he was, a 4 km shot is out of the question.

I just want you to be aware of the facts behind your argument, thats all.

Like if I said Swagger used a particular type of assault rifle in the movie, and you knew for a fact it was a different type of assault rifle, wouldnt you let me know?

No, you're avoiding the point. "It's in the movie", why does it not count now? Because it couldn't happen in real life? Guess what, we're debating which of two fictional characters would win in a hypothetical fight, key word FICTIONAL.

An exmaple of your never-ending bias:

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi

It is said in the movie, therefore it is valid, Swagger has counter intel training. Indo Story.

So it counts and Swagger gets his ass handed to him by the far superior sniper. "Indo story."

Edit: Now surprise everyone and swallow your pride by facing the facts.

Originally posted by Robtard
No, you're avoiding the point. [b]"It's in the movie", why does it not count now? Because it couldn't happen in real life? Guess what, we're debating which of two fictional characters would win in a hypothetical fight, key word FICTIONAL.

An exmaple of your never-ending bias:

So it counts and Swagger gets his ass handed to him by the far superior sniper. "Indo story."

Edit: Now surprise everyone and swallow your pride by facing the facts. [/B]

Facts? I AM facing the facts, that's what I have been trying to tell you. Rifles CANNOT shoot accurately at 4 km. But, as I said, fiction only goes so far with me, sooner or later a reality check is needed.

So it's rather simple then, your argument of "it's in the movie" only counts if it's beneficial to your argument/your boy. That sir, is being a dishonest *******.

Really, so when you were arguing in the Neo vs Luke thread, you were using "reality" as a basis for your arguments? The Force really exist? Lightsabers? Dishonest to the bitter end I see.

Dude, did you like totally miss what I was saying?

In the SW universe, yes, lightsabers exist. I didnt arm Luke with a Beretta 9mm because thoise do not exist in the SW universe.

No, I fully understand the double standard you're trying to apply and I'm calling you on it.

And in Hitman, 47 is capable of making a 4km shot, so it stands to reason that in that fictional world, a rifle capable of doing so exist, what is so hard to understand? ie "it's in the movie", as you say.

Do you really think bar-coded super assassin's trained from birth by some religious sect really exist, or are they fictional too?

Originally posted by Robtard
No, I fully understand the double standard you're trying to apply and I'm calling you on it.

And in Hitman, 47 is capable of making a 4km shot, so it stands to reason that in that fictional world, a rifle capable of doing so exist, what is so hard to understand? ie "it's in the movie", as you say.

Do you really think bar-coded super assassin's trained from birth by some religious sect really exist, or are they fictional too?

Well, like I said:

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If that's your outlook, then I guess I can't change it. Personally, I would never base an argument on a weapon when the FACTS about the weapon have been horribly blown out of proportion, and especially when the weapon was not used in the movie. but hey, that's just me. Swagger used a Barrett .50 cal in Shooter, so I use that in my arguments for him. If it was a different brand or caliber, I would use the correct rifle and caliber.

Facts? I AM facing the facts, that's what I have been trying to tell you. Rifles CANNOT shoot accurately at 4 km. But, as I said, fiction only goes so far with me, sooner or later a reality check is needed.

Originally posted by Robtard
So it's rather simple then, your argument of "it's in the movie" only counts if it's beneficial to your argument/your boy. That sir, is being a dishonest *******.

Could we quit with the name calling, Rob?

Originally posted by Impediment
Could we quit with the name calling, Rob?

I'm not calling him anything, I am factualy stating how he is acting. Instead of jumping on my back, why don't you point of how he is clearly being dishonest here, which is insulting in a debate. His double standard is rediculous.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Well, like I said:

You also said "I don't make assumptions, I purely go with what I see in the movies" in this very thread. Which isn't the case, as can be seen by anyone. Double standard for the win in your eyes, good show.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm not calling him anything, I am factualy stating how he is acting. Instead of jumping on my back, why don't you point of how he is clearly being dishonest here, which is insulting in a debate. His double standard is rediculous.

I do things one step at a time in my forums.

Right now, you are guilty of calling someone an a$$hole, even if you describe it as "factually stated".

Please don't do it anymore.

BTW RJ, grow the **** up and win a debate with intelligence and objectivity, lying and hitting the report button is childish, even for you.