Just how deadly is bow and arrow?

[Overdriven]

Roman arrowheads often had 3 barbs rather than the usual two. I imagine this was done in a lot of other places. Imagine getting hit with that shit and having to have it removed. I'd rather take a bullet any day.

[Nightmare798]

Roman arrowheads often had 3 barbs rather than the usual two. I imagine this was done in a lot of other places. Imagine getting hit with that shit and having to have it removed. I'd rather take a bullet any day.

I would think that manufacturing barbed arrows would be pretty expensive, but feel free to correct me if that is not true.

[Prinz_Karl]

    Dr. Bill estimates an “expert bowman can easily discharge six arrows per minute.”[8]  In one of Dr. Bill’s cases three soldiers suffered a total of 42 arrow wounds between them. Although this number of wounds was extreme, Bill states he rarely saw someone with a single arrow wound.[9]

Ok sorry, what I meant was that you wouldn't be hit by much more than one arrow and continue the charge. Considering archers used mass firing multiple arrow wounds are quite possible when the wounded troops were hit again. True.

[CrazyCracka420]

Roman arrowheads often had 3 barbs rather than the usual two. I imagine this was done in a lot of other places. Imagine getting hit with that shit and having to have it removed. I'd rather take a bullet any day.

Depends on the bullet.  A small caliber can easily rattle around off your bones and cause a lot more damage than a clean "in and out" wound (or one that stops in you without bouncing around).  Imagine a piece of steel rattling around inside your chest at high speeds (or hell even your thigh...cross your fingers it doesn't hit an artery while it's pin-balling around)...

Or a high caliber can basically explode on the exit wound, creating a massive hole where it exits that is way larger than the hole that would be caused by pulling out a barbed arrow.