Talk:Death Sentence - Revision history

Survivalkid21: /* Possible misquote? */

2012-12-12T19:58:24Z

Possible misquote?

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:58, 12 December 2012
Line 50:		Line 50:

	He said "Half Cannon" for sure, I had subtitles on while I watched the movie. I assumed he said "Half Cannon" referring to the .50 caliber bullet being half an inch in diameter, hence "Half Cannon". --[[User:Yournamehere\|Yournamehere]] 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		He said "Half Cannon" for sure, I had subtitles on while I watched the movie. I assumed he said "Half Cannon" referring to the .50 caliber bullet being half an inch in diameter, hence "Half Cannon". --[[User:Yournamehere\|Yournamehere]] 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			:Someone marked it the Eagle as the .44 Magnum version, not the .50 AE. Not sure if it is myself though. -Survivalkid21

	==Nick's weapons choices==		==Nick's weapons choices==

Ballistics Expert2: /* Pump shotgun help */

2011-09-04T03:40:47Z

Pump shotgun help

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:40, 4 September 2011
Line 42:		Line 42:
	[[Image:DS-PUMP-2.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|]]		[[Image:DS-PUMP-2.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|]]
	[[Image:DS-PUMP-3.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|]]		[[Image:DS-PUMP-3.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|]]

			It's entirely possible this is a Smith & Wesson 3000 model shotgun. It's visually similar to the Remington 870 with the rounded bolt and the slide near the end of the magazine tube, but with enough differences to make it stand out.

	==Possible misquote?==		==Possible misquote?==

Ballistics Expert2: /* Revenge is the best ammunition . . . */

2011-08-11T13:05:49Z

Revenge is the best ammunition . . .

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:05, 11 August 2011
Line 93:		Line 93:

	The movie is awesome, who really cares? - ZeoRanger5		The movie is awesome, who really cares? - ZeoRanger5

			I don't know but when I watch this movie I get the feeling of it being somewhat surreal in nature.

	== Mix and match ==		== Mix and match ==

Ballistics Expert2: /* Nick's weapons choices */

2011-07-20T03:06:11Z

Nick's weapons choices

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:06, 20 July 2011
Line 80:		Line 80:
	Edit: I think I may've figured out why he went to Bones. Simply put: He didn't know where else to go. Obviously, Nick doesn't know much about guns, so he didn't know where he could find stores/shows. In the bar, he tells the Spanish guy: "I need to buy some guns." As in, "Tell me where to find guns." He was already nearby, so he thought he'd kill two birds with one stone. (find Billy, and get some guns.)		Edit: I think I may've figured out why he went to Bones. Simply put: He didn't know where else to go. Obviously, Nick doesn't know much about guns, so he didn't know where he could find stores/shows. In the bar, he tells the Spanish guy: "I need to buy some guns." As in, "Tell me where to find guns." He was already nearby, so he thought he'd kill two birds with one stone. (find Billy, and get some guns.)

	Well let's face facts. It's safe to say that Nick knows nearly nothing about guns, his lock 'n' load sequence is proof of that. The way he's haphazardly handling his newest purchases, violating every safety rule in the book, being unfamiliar with how to properly load a gun, etc. He likely went with the simplest options he was aware of at the time rather than what the more knowledgeable of us would have selected for efficiency purposes.		Well let's face facts. It's safe to say that Nick knows nearly nothing about guns, his lock 'n' load sequence is proof of that. The way he's haphazardly handling his newest purchases, violating every safety rule in the book, being unfamiliar with how to properly load a gun, etc. He likely went with the simplest options he was aware of at the time rather than what the more knowledgeable of us would have selected for efficiency purposes. -[[User:Ballistics_Expert2\|Ballistics_Expert2]]

	== Revenge is the best ammunition . . . ==		== Revenge is the best ammunition . . . ==

Ballistics Expert2: /* Nick's weapons choices */

2011-07-20T03:05:13Z

Nick's weapons choices

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 20 July 2011
Line 79:		Line 79:
	A question, then: Why'd he take the DB and not, for example, the Cobray streetsweeper next to it?		A question, then: Why'd he take the DB and not, for example, the Cobray streetsweeper next to it?
	Edit: I think I may've figured out why he went to Bones. Simply put: He didn't know where else to go. Obviously, Nick doesn't know much about guns, so he didn't know where he could find stores/shows. In the bar, he tells the Spanish guy: "I need to buy some guns." As in, "Tell me where to find guns." He was already nearby, so he thought he'd kill two birds with one stone. (find Billy, and get some guns.)		Edit: I think I may've figured out why he went to Bones. Simply put: He didn't know where else to go. Obviously, Nick doesn't know much about guns, so he didn't know where he could find stores/shows. In the bar, he tells the Spanish guy: "I need to buy some guns." As in, "Tell me where to find guns." He was already nearby, so he thought he'd kill two birds with one stone. (find Billy, and get some guns.)

			Well let's face facts. It's safe to say that Nick knows nearly nothing about guns, his lock 'n' load sequence is proof of that. The way he's haphazardly handling his newest purchases, violating every safety rule in the book, being unfamiliar with how to properly load a gun, etc. He likely went with the simplest options he was aware of at the time rather than what the more knowledgeable of us would have selected for efficiency purposes.

	== Revenge is the best ammunition . . . ==		== Revenge is the best ammunition . . . ==

Ballistics Expert2: /* Mix and match */

2011-07-20T01:07:39Z

Mix and match

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:07, 20 July 2011
Line 97:		Line 97:

	I noticed that too. I assumed that Bones thought that Nick wouldn't notice and/or care. -SasquatchJim.		I noticed that too. I assumed that Bones thought that Nick wouldn't notice and/or care. -SasquatchJim.

			So I finally got a copy of the movie and started watching it, and in the scene where Nick is acquiring his goods I noticed that Bones gave him four white boxes of ammo, and on the front of the box was "Full Flash 9mm". Besides not being the correct ammo for any of Nick's guns, does anybody have theories as to the significance of this? Maybe a generic stage prop because Remington and Winchester didn't want their name associated with this picture? -Ballistics_Expert2

Predator20: /* 1911 or 1991? */

2011-01-03T18:47:08Z

1911 or 1991?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:47, 3 January 2011
Line 33:		Line 33:
	I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
	:So, what you're saying is, if there's no actual proof that it's a certain variation of a firearm, but I think it is, I should just change it and have the page locked? Yes, that's a brilliant way to actually determine what kind of firearm it is. Point being, we cannot determine whether it's actually a 1991 or not, and therefore, it's stupid to claim that it is one. There is no concrete evidence to it being one, and while you claim the rollmark style proves that it's a 1991, I strongly disagree. I cannot even see any rollmarks on the gun, just a large patch of discoloration where almost any rollmarks could fit. But obviously, you're going to keep it as a 1991, even though you haven't proven that it is such. Fine. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 16:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		:So, what you're saying is, if there's no actual proof that it's a certain variation of a firearm, but I think it is, I should just change it and have the page locked? Yes, that's a brilliant way to actually determine what kind of firearm it is. Point being, we cannot determine whether it's actually a 1991 or not, and therefore, it's stupid to claim that it is one. There is no concrete evidence to it being one, and while you claim the rollmark style proves that it's a 1991, I strongly disagree. I cannot even see any rollmarks on the gun, just a large patch of discoloration where almost any rollmarks could fit. But obviously, you're going to keep it as a 1991, even though you haven't proven that it is such. Fine. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 16:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			::You're going to argue these shots aren't clear enough, but I'm going to post them anyway. Looks to me like it says Series 80 below the ejection port. I'm not sure of any other makers that mark their 1911s there. "No clear evidence?" The rollmark style says it is, the grips, the slightly taller sights from the GI style, flat mainspring vs the arched seen on the GI models, parkerized finish. What more do you want? --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 18:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			[[Image:DS-1991-1.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|looks like Series 80 to me.]]
			[[Image:DS-1991-1.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|image brightened]]

	==Pump shotgun help==		==Pump shotgun help==

Acora: /* 1911 or 1991? */

2011-01-03T16:36:32Z

1911 or 1991?

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 3 January 2011
Line 32:		Line 32:

	I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			:So, what you're saying is, if there's no actual proof that it's a certain variation of a firearm, but I think it is, I should just change it and have the page locked? Yes, that's a brilliant way to actually determine what kind of firearm it is. Point being, we cannot determine whether it's actually a 1991 or not, and therefore, it's stupid to claim that it is one. There is no concrete evidence to it being one, and while you claim the rollmark style proves that it's a 1991, I strongly disagree. I cannot even see any rollmarks on the gun, just a large patch of discoloration where almost any rollmarks could fit. But obviously, you're going to keep it as a 1991, even though you haven't proven that it is such. Fine. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 16:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

	==Pump shotgun help==		==Pump shotgun help==

Predator20: /* 1911 or 1991? */

2011-01-03T15:35:08Z

1911 or 1991?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 3 January 2011
Line 31:		Line 31:
	[[Image:HP-1911-3.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|Heaven's Prisoners. Note Colt MK IV Series 80 on the slide.]]		[[Image:HP-1911-3.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|Heaven's Prisoners. Note Colt MK IV Series 80 on the slide.]]

	I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (~~M199A1~~) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

	==Pump shotgun help==		==Pump shotgun help==

Predator20: /* 1911 or 1991? */

2011-01-03T15:09:20Z

1911 or 1991?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:09, 3 January 2011
Line 25:		Line 25:
	[[Image:ColtM1991A1R.jpg\|thumb\|none\|500px\|Colt M1991A1]]		[[Image:ColtM1991A1R.jpg\|thumb\|none\|500px\|Colt M1991A1]]
	Predator, it resembles a blued 1911A1 with black grips that bear the Colt logo. That, quite honestly, could be nearly ''any'' 1911 variant, so unless we see a good shot of the rollmarks, we can't make a conclusive judgement. Seeing as other then possibly this case, I haven't seen any 1991A1's in any film whatsoever, it's much more likely a standard 1911. Besides, the rollmarks should be fairly easy to see, if they were there, and I don't see anything on our screenshots. Therefore, I'm changing it back. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 11:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		Predator, it resembles a blued 1911A1 with black grips that bear the Colt logo. That, quite honestly, could be nearly ''any'' 1911 variant, so unless we see a good shot of the rollmarks, we can't make a conclusive judgement. Seeing as other then possibly this case, I haven't seen any 1991A1's in any film whatsoever, it's much more likely a standard 1911. Besides, the rollmarks should be fairly easy to see, if they were there, and I don't see anything on our screenshots. Therefore, I'm changing it back. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 11:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			::You haven't seen it listed in any in film, because most likely there haven't been any good close ups to say it was. More often than not, when we see a 1911 in film. Chances are there is never any good identifying marks of the make. So we just call it a M1911A1, when it could be a Series 70 or 80 Colt, Springfield whatever. Take [[Heaven's Prisoners]]. If there wasn't this one close up of the gun, I would have went about calling it a M1911A1 when it's actually a Colt MK IV Series 80. Which is why I added this note in the [[M1911A1]] section. :

			''Note many in the list below could actually be Colt Mark IV Series 70/80 Government Models, Springfield Armory, or another manufacturer. Instead of a former military issued M1911A1, unless its a war film. Since the markings of the gun aren't always clear, M1911A1 is a catch-all term. Being most 1911 manufacturers pistols are based off the M1911A1 platform.''

			[[Image:HP-1911-3.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|Heaven's Prisoners. Note Colt MK IV Series 80 on the slide.]]

			I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M199A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

	==Pump shotgun help==		==Pump shotgun help==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:47, 3 January 2011
Line 33:		Line 33:
	I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		I reverted you edits again and locked the page. The rollmarks may not ''clearly'' show Colt M1991A1 it's rollmark style says it does. While it's just a screencap, it also has the plastic looking trigger found on them also. Lastly the grips found on them (M1991A1) and some other Series 80 Colts. While they could be changed, why would they do that? I tell you one thing else it's not an actual [[M1911A1]]. --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 15:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
	:So, what you're saying is, if there's no actual proof that it's a certain variation of a firearm, but I think it is, I should just change it and have the page locked? Yes, that's a brilliant way to actually determine what kind of firearm it is. Point being, we cannot determine whether it's actually a 1991 or not, and therefore, it's stupid to claim that it is one. There is no concrete evidence to it being one, and while you claim the rollmark style proves that it's a 1991, I strongly disagree. I cannot even see any rollmarks on the gun, just a large patch of discoloration where almost any rollmarks could fit. But obviously, you're going to keep it as a 1991, even though you haven't proven that it is such. Fine. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 16:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)		:So, what you're saying is, if there's no actual proof that it's a certain variation of a firearm, but I think it is, I should just change it and have the page locked? Yes, that's a brilliant way to actually determine what kind of firearm it is. Point being, we cannot determine whether it's actually a 1991 or not, and therefore, it's stupid to claim that it is one. There is no concrete evidence to it being one, and while you claim the rollmark style proves that it's a 1991, I strongly disagree. I cannot even see any rollmarks on the gun, just a large patch of discoloration where almost any rollmarks could fit. But obviously, you're going to keep it as a 1991, even though you haven't proven that it is such. Fine. [[User:Acora\|Acora]] 16:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			::You're going to argue these shots aren't clear enough, but I'm going to post them anyway. Looks to me like it says Series 80 below the ejection port. I'm not sure of any other makers that mark their 1911s there. "No clear evidence?" The rollmark style says it is, the grips, the slightly taller sights from the GI style, flat mainspring vs the arched seen on the GI models, parkerized finish. What more do you want? --[[User:Predator20\|Predator20]] 18:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
			[[Image:DS-1991-1.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|looks like Series 80 to me.]]
			[[Image:DS-1991-1.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px\|image brightened]]

	==Pump shotgun help==		==Pump shotgun help==