Executor-class SSD.

That counts as one weapon, as it is one physical object.

If I can't have that, then I'd take a silenced G-36K with a bipod and I/R laser.

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

I might reconsider that if I were you. The M16 is very accurate, but not very powerful. The AK-47 is powerful, but doesn't have much accuracy. The M-4, though, is a mixture of the two, combining the AK-47's power with the M-16's accuracy to create a better gun.

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

you could crap in an Ak-47 barrel, let it sit there for a year or two, then you can clean it out with a sock tied to stick soaked with oil, and you still could shoot a guys dick off at 100 - 200 yards, an m-16? you might blow off your hand, or destroy your gun if you did that, also the AK-47 uses a larger bullet than the m-16 and is waay cheaper to manufacture than the M-16

Owned

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, Danavers wrote: To all the faggots that keep saying AK-47, this is 2009, not 1958. There's newer versions.

True, but terrorists still have their hands glued to the original AK-47, and their asses glued to dynamite.

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, DevilDog016 wrote: Executor-class SSD.

That counts as one weapon, as it is one physical object.

Damn why didn't I think of that!

At 9/13/09 04:27 PM, The-Adrian wrote:

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

I might reconsider that if I were you. The M16 is very accurate, but not very powerful. The AK-47 is powerful, but doesn't have much accuracy. The M-4, though, is a mixture of the two, combining the AK-47's power with the M-16's accuracy to create a better gun.

Also, Vietnam taught Americans that, when in a place filled with mud and water, you can't win a war with overly-complex, ultra-tight jam-prone weapons. That's why a bunch of rice farmers with AK-47's put them to shame. History, boy.

ICBMs. I love blowing stuff up.

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, Danavers wrote: To all the faggots that keep saying AK-47, this is 2009, not 1958. There's newer versions.

Ok how about the AN-94

A lightsaber, I would use it to kill some people in my school/

At 9/13/09 04:31 PM, FatJoe214 wrote:

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, Danavers wrote: To all the faggots that keep saying AK-47, this is 2009, not 1958. There's newer versions.

Ok how about the AN-94

Forget ICBMs! Give me that puppy and I'll show you how hard penis shots are these days.

No seriously, where can you get that thing? I'm practically drooling with thoughts of shooting something with that.

At 9/13/09 04:30 PM, DragonFyre9 wrote:

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, DevilDog016 wrote: Executor-class SSD.

That counts as one weapon, as it is one physical object.

Damn why didn't I think of that!

You could have thought of this... But I did now, so it doesn't count anymore.

I want me this, Santa! Pl0x.

The noisy mother fucking cricket.

At 9/13/09 04:27 PM, The-Adrian wrote:

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

I might reconsider that if I were you. The M16 is very accurate, but not very powerful. The AK-47 is powerful, but doesn't have much accuracy. The M-4, though, is a mixture of the two, combining the AK-47's power with the M-16's accuracy to create a better gun.

You, sir, are an idiot. The M4 fires from a shorter barrel, therefore decreasing its accuracy, and lowering its power. AND the 5.56x45 NATO will always be more accurate than the 7.62x39 Soviet, but is less powerful.

At 9/13/09 04:26 PM, Danavers wrote: To all the faggots that keep saying AK-47, this is 2009, not 1958. There's newer versions.

7.62 = So much better than 5.45.

I'm completely aware that there are newer versions. The 47 would still be my choice.

[IMG]http://ui29.gamespot.com/732/sniper crowbar_2.jpg[/IMG]

well if i had to use my personal arsenal i would take the pump shotgun

but if im allowed any weapon. i would want the assassin's creed hidden blade. unfortunatley that requires the loss of my finger o_0

I'ce been wanting to get a replica of Kind Theoden's sword for a long time now. Not for use obviously, I need something to mount on my wall. I just love the horses on the hilt.

XM8.

Too bad it accidentally the whole budget.

At 9/13/09 04:43 PM, mastershake141 wrote: XM8.

Too bad it accidentally the whole budget.

MELTS MELTS MELTS.
Also, in addition to my last post, you don't hear the USMC bitching about the lack of power of the M16. That is because the 5.56 was designed to be fire from a 20-inch barrel, not a 14-inch one.

dildo launcher

need i say more?

I want a katana, sure I would have to learn how to use it properly, but it's a fucking bad ass weapon to have and use. I would just go around asking people to have a sword fight, man imagine the pussy I would get.

That's a toughy. I would take either

(1) A Tommy Gun; basically a .45 bullet hose, it looks SO bad ass, it has a front handle, a drum-clip, it fires incredibly fucking fast, and it's actually pretty powerful. Dick Tracy, John Dillinger, and all the bad-asses used this gun. It's great!

or

(2) A Ninjato; thin, so it can fly through the air very fast, but it is strong and powerful, unlike a fucking Katana, piece of shit. But back to the Ninjato, it is commonly used by Ninjas, because Ninjato translates to 'Ninja's Sword' or something along those lines.

At 9/13/09 04:05 PM, blazer133 wrote: the mother fucking death star.

you have won the thread, sir.

The Golden Gun from the 007 series. Dun Dun Da Duh

At 9/13/09 03:55 PM, Obsessed117 wrote:

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

Considering you haven't shot either of them unless you are in the military and certified to do so, then your opinion does not matter.

Don't get all pissy, okay douche bag? 99% of the people on NG haven't shot a gun ever ever. YOU'RE SPECIAL, OKAY!? Stop shoving it in our faces just because you shot a gun.

At 9/13/09 04:59 PM, AmateurSOCOMer wrote: The Golden Gun from the 007 series. Dun Dun Da Duh

YES!!!

Chainsaw Armour.

Try telling me thats not a weapon.

halberd. their bitchen

At 9/13/09 04:38 PM, disasterarea wrote:

At 9/13/09 04:27 PM, The-Adrian wrote:

At 9/13/09 03:50 PM, spikedude101 wrote: AK-47s SUCK

I'd get a M-16

I might reconsider that if I were you. The M16 is very accurate, but not very powerful. The AK-47 is powerful, but doesn't have much accuracy. The M-4, though, is a mixture of the two, combining the AK-47's power with the M-16's accuracy to create a better gun.

You, sir, are an idiot. The M4 fires from a shorter barrel, therefore decreasing its accuracy, and lowering its power. AND the 5.56x45 NATO will always be more accurate than the 7.62x39 Soviet, but is less powerful.

Get your facts straight before posting, and don't accuse people because your over-inflated ego tells you so, you fucking troll. 2/3 of what you say is wrong, FFS. The M4 carbine has a muzzle velocity of almost 900m/s, while the AK-47 has a muzzle velocity of 715 m/s. Your generalization of "longer barrel = faster MV" is misinforming, proven so by the MV's of those two compared weapons. Also, the difference in the energy (power) of a 5.56x45mm NATO and a 7.62x39mm is only of 300-400 Joules in favor of the Russian cartridge. If I shoot you in the chest with an M4 you'll be as dead as if I shot you with an AK-47, and I can carry twice the weight in 5.56x45 cartridges than 7.62x39, meaning potentially twice the kills. Most fights are fought at 100m range, so accuracy is not something to worry about unless you're firing a fucking Makarov. Think further than which weapon fires faster/is more powerful, and think of the human variable too.

i'm still in full support of the dildo launcher