wildcat junkie

And is that lumping all Christians into that group?

Only in your delusional mind does that constitute lumping all Christians into that group. Just because some Christians were Fascists doesn't mean all are fascists just as I'm sure not all fascists are Christian. Your challenge was to name one Christian group that persecuted another religious group. That is exactly what I did. No more, no less. You're the guy that has a penchant for lumping all those of a particular religious sect in to one category. After all, isn't you are trying to do with Muslims with this thread?

If you try real hard you might just figure out what POST #62 is. But I doubt it.

I wasn't the one that brought up the term "political correctness"

Yeah right!

Please be so kind as to point out, without FOX News style editing, where I lumped individuals in any religious group into one category. That is your MO. Even bigots can't be lumped into one homogeneous group. They come in all religions & ethnic groups. That's the point. Again, POST #62 is proven by your actions.

Political correctness : agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people. In this case conservatives.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Your "quote" posts are as empty as the space between your ears ants. When are you going to learn how to do that?

There you go again, your feeble intellect is incapable of separating the bad apples in any group from the peace loving multitudes. How dare you lump all Christians in with the fascists!

I'm sooooo tired of this "conservative political correctness". Anything that doesn't fit their tunnel vision perspective is a "rant". Again & again their reactions to any differing opinions as a threat prove the scientific findings of the study that was quoted in POST #62

Just curious. How long does it take you to climb up to the bottom of the barrel when you are seeking the (relative) enlightenment of liberal stupidity? Such a monumental undertaking must be exhausting.

Mr VJP spends a LOT of time @ the bottom of the barrel. In fact, it appears to be one of his favorite habitats.

Maybe if you were Native American you might understand how it is a slur to them. BTW; I believe Pale Face is a slur that was used by Native Americans & Redneck is also a slur to those that might not glorify the lifestyle. Slurs are usually instigated by the users, not the persons being slurred.

Maybe this response is "strong" enough so that the "point" will not go sailing over your head. Maybe WNBA franchises should have named some of their teams with gender slurs. How about the New York Whores or the Chicago Bitches or maybe even the Minnesota C****s. Do you understand what a "slur" is now?

This is all starting to remind me of Germany in the 1930s.

The fact that you view anti-bigotry as anti-Christian would seem to bring your own Christian values into question. The fact that you view NOT lumping all Muslims into a group that is to be hated as anti-Christian seems to suggest that you are full of hate yourself. Again that brings your Christian values into question.

The only thing more dismal than the small number of toadies that follow your delusional rants is your microscopic aptitude for basic mathematical data. Since you brought it up (AGAIN) your up-votes since the LAST REALITY CHECK = 67. My up-votes in the same time period = 122. So, it seems that by the numbers, your recent (comparative) number of followers is now lagging by 73%.

The only unsound reasoning is your poor grasp of mathematical evidence.

Well that kind of proves the point. Even though kinetic energy might be about equal, penetration of the heavy/slow arrow will be greater all other things being equal. You also mention energy loss as range increases. the Heavy arrow will not slow down as quickly as the lighter albeit faster/light arrow. Kind of like the difference between a 150gr bullet out of a 30-06 & a 180gr bullet. The information I have been able to find indicates that Fred Bear used a 70# recurve to take his elephant. I doubt that a 70# compound shooting light arrows would be able to do that & arrow speed is affected by weight a lot more W/a compound than a recurve. I once ran arrows over a chronograph out of my 60# recurve, I shot 145gr screw in points & then 100gr points.There was only 2 fps difference. Arrow speed was in the 200 fps range. Long bows are even less affected by heavy arrow weight. Kinetic energy works as a judgement of effectiveness only when there isn't a large variance in arrow weight. To simplify the mathematical results, lets compare a 350gr arrow @ 400 fps, it will have a lot more kinetic energy than the 700gr arrow @ 200 fps. The lighter arrow will have 2 X the kinetic energy but momentum will,be the same as the heavier/slower arrow. This is @ the bow. As the range increases, the velocity will drop faster for the lighter arrow thus even though it will still have a kinetic energy advantage @ 20 yds, the heavy arrow should have a momentum advantage. The English defeated the French @ Agincourt because the English longbow could lob heavy arrows over long distance like artillery while the French crossbows were ineffective at those ranges.

Which explains your dismally small yet vocal following.

I think it's 1000ft# at 100 yds isn't it? I saw one state that had 900ft# @ 100yds as minimum.

It's not "politically correct" to point out "conservative" oppression of rights.on this forum. Only liberals are evil.

I did some checking & .24 is the minimum in all the states I checked so you are correct. I saw a video of an antelope poaching sting operation & I thought there was mention of people illegally using a .243 for elk.

Kinetic energy is not a good formula for calculating arrow lethality as it uses the square of the velocity. A 65# longbow shooting a 700gr arrow W/cut on contact broadheads would have ample penetration for large bears. Fred Bear used a 60# recurve to take his African lion.