Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The original AK47 was fully automatic. Totally different than a semi auto.
The AK was basically a Soviet weapon designed after the premise of the German STG 44. Though simpler and in a higher powered cartridge. It started hitting Soviet forces into service in the late 40s, thus the "47" in it's designation. It was the second select fire weapon to be used in numbers after the STG 44. The US was still using the semi auto only M1 Garand when the Soviets went to the AK.
They were using the semi auto only SKS before that which they surplused out to countries like NK and later N Viet Nam. In terms of simplicity of operation and maintenance the AK was superior to the Garand. It was also lighter and more ammunition could be carried both in the weapon and on a soldier. Accuracy and brute power went to the Garand.
In the very late 70s and early 80s AK variants, mostly Chinese , began being imported to the US. Ploy Tech was the big dog on that block. At first these did not gain a lot of steam with American shooters because the AK is dismally inaccurate. They were more novelties than anything . But as time went on they gained traction amongst the "assault" minded set.
Cheaper to own an to shoot as well compared to an AR M1A or Garand they caught on. These rifles became infamous after Patrick Purdeys shooting at a Stockton CA school in 1986 or so. Poly Tech also made a version of the M1A. Both Poly Tech and Norinco firearms became unavailable after Clinton banned imports from China of their variants of all firearms. I have an early 90s Norinco 1911 that I stripped to a bare frame and slide and built back up. It's a great gun and as good as any Colt out there now. But alas an affordable builder on that platform is a distant memory.
Most AKs I have seen for sale out there now are either domestically made or from Romania now. But the AK knock offs are not the boogeyman so much as the AR anymore. They used to be the big demon though. The AK AR and to some extent the Ruger Mini 14 have been the weapons use in these nut case mass shootings. The M1 Garand, M1A, and imports from HK, Steyr and others of foreign service type rifles have not been used for such nefarious purpose. Now that is due to cost even after the 94 import ban expired they are still very expensive.
We were literally awash in Garands for a long time and not one was ever use in any kind of mass event. And until 86 no other semi auto service variant was used either. That is a more modern event. It seems to have come on he heels of societal changes. What effect those changes have had and which ones are most responsible is the subject of much debate.
Last edited by NVplumber; 08-18-2019 at 09:28 AM..
There is no need for anyone to possess an assault style weapon. They are not hunting weapons and are solely for the mass destruction of human life.
Anyone that argues that people should have the right to possess these weapons needs to have their mental state questioned.
When my home was being broken into, the police took 13 minutes to arrive. The three responding officers Carrie two ARs and one shotgun. I think we can reasonably say that they carried with them the tools necessary to deal with the potential threat, with three houses in the neighborhood having recently been burglarized by multiple intruders.
Please explain why I, facing that same potential threat, should not be able to arm myself equally well as the police, particularly given that I will be facing it alone.
And that, boys and girls, is just one reason to have ARs with STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES available to those who choose who keep them.
The AR platform is like a Mr. Potato Head. They have hundreds of different attachments. You can swap the attachments around, mix and match them, and have different looking results each time.
It's very difficult to obtain an assault rifle and expensive too.
For who? People that know nothing about the inter-workings of a firearm?
Design of the trigger, hammer, safety/selector and sear, is all the difference in single fire and rapid fire.
None of which is even remotely relevant. The US is not going to use nuclear weapons on its on soil.
Whether the US has zero tanks or 1 Million tanks isn't relevant, either.
The only people who mention tanks are those who know nothing about tanks.
Tanks are of no value in a civil war, except for the "intimidation factor."
For those who never served and those who have no contact with the military and whose only source of info is Hollywood films, I can see why they might be intimidated by a tank.
But, for those of us who know, tanks are no big deal.
There are 100s of 1,000s of miles of roads in the US that tanks cannot travel upon.
Those roads weren't built for tanks and tanks will tear them up. Trailing tanks might follow, and so might Bradleys, but not wheeled vehicles. Wheeled vehicles will have to double-back and find a different route.
There are 100s of 1,000s of bridges in the US that tanks and IFVs cannot travel upon, either.
The weight of the tank is too great and the bridge will buckle or out-right collapse. So, now you have a dead or injured tank crew, a damaged or destroyed tank, and you have to wait around for hours waiting for the engineers to come up and find a way to bridge the area, assuming that's even possible.
Something else about tracked vehicles: they cannot traverse slopes greater than 35°.
If you've ever traveled in Germany, you might have noticed autobahns are elevated above the surrounding terrain by 3 meters to 6 meters.
That's by design, not accident.
Who on this forum would like to know why?
Because Hitler wanted them built that way as defensive barriers.
Since the slopes are 35°, no country's tracked vehicles like tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, self-propelled howitzers, air defense platforms and engineering equipment can't traverse them.
That means you have to bring up the engineers and waste time blasting a hole through the berm, which is the whole freaking point.
Or, you have to waste valuable time trying to find a way around it, which is also the whole freaking point.
It's shocking really how little you all know.
And who would crew them?
Do you understand that tanks require infantry support?
Obviously not.
Where are you going to find the 100s of people to operate your support services?
Tanks get stuck. That's what they do. During Desert Storm, lots of tanks got stuck and that was mostly flat open terrain.
Are you going to recover the tank, or just leave it for capture?
When you run out of ammo, whose going to be carrying it for you?
Nukes are irrelevant and only ignorant people bring them up to side-track the issue.
Fissile materials are strictly regulated and governed by all countries for many different reasons including adherence and compliance to certain international treaties and covenants.
I can see where uninformed people wouldn't be aware of that.
No country is going to allow nuclear weapons to be produced for consumer consumption.
Again, only disingenuous people mention nukes when they get beaten and try to side-track the debate.
Even if States did let people buy nuclear weapons, as with a great many things, they would require compliance to regulations.
Before you bought your nuke, you'd have to build an ABREST -- Atomic Blast-Resistant Earth-covered Structure.
That's 20' x 10' x 40' at a minimum with 3' thick reinforced concrete covered with 3 meters of earth.
And then at least one 10-ton blast door, but not any blast-door, a blast-door with weighted vents tethered with lead (Pb).
Why lead?
Um, because lead melts at low temperatures, so if there was a fire in your ABREST the lead tether would start to melt and the weights would help break the tether allowing the vents to close to cut off the air supply that would feed the fire.
Good luck getting a bank to loan you the money for that.
But, none of that matters, because you'd never get a bank to loan you the money to buy the permissive action link system which costs a helluva lot more than your house costs.
No, it does not.
The operand is "bear arms."
If you cannot carry it -- which is what "bear" means -- then you cannot have it.
Let's walk through this slowly.
Does the 2nd cover bazooka s?
If not, why?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
