What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

"Assault" Weapons

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
33,458
Reaction score
17,674
Points
1,915
you leftist always like to go to extremes
WTF! Idiot, I'm one of the most right leaning conservatives on the forum!

View attachment 492007


when you fail to make your point,
YOU ARE THE ONE NEEDING TO MAKE ONE, asshole! You have some serious emotional insecurities and gun hang ups!


we are talking about one of the most efficient guns ever to be created,
No we are not. And "efficiency," whatever the fuck THAT is supposed to mean now, is no factor is making your case that you refuse/can't make. I'm syiill waiting for you to show us anywhere that offers a definition of a "weapon of war" that includes weapons never used in war!!!! :21:

, and youre saying you wouldnt use it in war if thats all you had,,
I NEVER SAID THAT, Idiot. What, do you hear voices in your head? One too many doobies too early in the day?

as for your pencil,, if thats all I have I can try and sneak up on a person and stab them in the eye and take their better weapon,,
YOU DO THAT.
then why arent you standing up for the true intent of the 2nd A and instead making excuses that the AR cant be used as a weapon of war??

would you use one in war if thats all you had??
my guess in your refusal to answer a simple question is you know it will prove your narrative wrong,,
what say you??
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
46,805
Reaction score
29,066
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
 

Slyhunter

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
10,862
Reaction score
1,554
Points
290
Location
Florida
are you even reading my comments??
No.

I said it doesnt have to be used to be one,, any weapon at hand is a weapon of war
And that is a bogus definition, unsupported by any dictionary I know of. By your logic, a pencil is now a weapon of war, not because it has been used in combat, but because it could.

DUCK! Here comes my #2 flying at your face. :auiqs.jpg:
Van Claude would disagree with you there. I've seen him use pencils.
or him -->
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34,523
Reaction score
18,538
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
Maybe I misread that before. Let me look at my sources and get back to you. I was certain they said the AK was a full-auto only, replacing the PPSh-41.
 
OP
Leo123

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
14,204
Reaction score
7,598
Points
1,065

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34,523
Reaction score
18,538
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
Looks like I was wrong.

The Type 1 was a stamped select-fire variant that sucked so bad that they stopped production. They went to the milled version (type 2) until they could get the manufacturing process figured out. I must have misread the information on the type 2 because I thought it was a full-auto until they fixed all the problems, but they were all select fire all the way through the ak-74.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
46,805
Reaction score
29,066
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
Looks like I was wrong.

The Type 1 was a stamped select-fire variant that sucked so bad that they stopped production. They went to the milled version (type 2) until they could get the manufacturing process figured out. I must have misread the information on the type 2 because I thought it was a full-auto until they fixed all the problems, but they were all select fire all the way through the ak-74.


That is fine. Firearms history is complex at times and I have certainly got it wrong too many times.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34,523
Reaction score
18,538
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
Looks like I was wrong.

The Type 1 was a stamped select-fire variant that sucked so bad that they stopped production. They went to the milled version (type 2) until they could get the manufacturing process figured out. I must have misread the information on the type 2 because I thought it was a full-auto until they fixed all the problems, but they were all select fire all the way through the ak-74.


That is fine. Firearms history is complex at times and I have certainly got it wrong too many times.
Especially this bastard mutt (literally it was a hodge-podge of different designs).

My mom and dad both served in the Mekong Delta from 1968-69 (Mom was Army MASH - 02)(Dad was Army---something??? E5) They met each other at the Dong Tam Base Camp.


Were you ever there?
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
46,805
Reaction score
29,066
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
Fires the 7.62.39, but technically, the AK is not an assault rifle, because it does not have select fire. It only fires in full-auto mode.
Good post but every AK I saw in Vietnam, both Russian and Chinese, had select fire.
That was the AKM (1959).

The AKM is an assault rifle chambered in 7.62×39mm Soviet intermediate cartridge. It is a selective fire, gas operated with a rotating bolt, firing in either semi-automatic or fully automatic, and has a cyclic rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute (RPM). The gas operated action has a massive bolt carrier with a permanently attached long stroke gas piston. The gas chamber is located above the barrel. The bolt carrier rides on the two rails, formed on the side of the receiver, with a significant space between the moving and stationary parts.[3] Despite being replaced in the late 1970s by the AK-74, the AKM is still in service in some Russian Army reserve and second-line units and several east European countries. The GRAU officially designated the AKM as the 6P1 assault rifle.


As far as I know the original AK-47 was select fire just like the AKM.

The improvements for the AKM did several things but as far as I know none of them was changing from F-A only to select fire. Do you have any references on that?

By the way, we would occassionaly find an AK with a milled receiver in Vietnam so they would have been the original AKs. However, most of them were the AKMs with the stamped receivers.
Looks like I was wrong.

The Type 1 was a stamped select-fire variant that sucked so bad that they stopped production. They went to the milled version (type 2) until they could get the manufacturing process figured out. I must have misread the information on the type 2 because I thought it was a full-auto until they fixed all the problems, but they were all select fire all the way through the ak-74.


That is fine. Firearms history is complex at times and I have certainly got it wrong too many times.
Especially this bastard mutt (literally it was a hodge-podge of different designs).

My mom and dad both served in the Mekong Delta from 1968-69 (Mom was Army MASH - 02)(Dad was Army---something??? E5) They met each other at the Dong Tam Base Camp.


Were you ever there?
The only time I remember going to the Delta was to go to Can Tho. I stayed for a couple of days and then went back to Nha Trang.

I am a Florida boy and I remember it being like Florida on steroids.
 

Canon Shooter

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
8,832
Reaction score
7,769
Points
1,938
doesnt matter because the 2nd A was specifically for weapons of war,,,

I just read the 2nd Amendment three times, and I can't see where the phrase "weapons of war" is included.

Would you be so kind as to point it out?

Thanks so much...
 

Canon Shooter

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
8,832
Reaction score
7,769
Points
1,938
I dont worry about what stupid people think or say,,

I just remind them that the 2nd was specific for weapons of war and tell them to fuck off

It's funny to watch you say that it was written for "weapons of war" (which is wasn't) right after you criticize stupid people.

Self-hatred much?
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,435
Reaction score
4,635
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
I just read the 2nd Amendment three times, and I can't see where the phrase "weapons of war" is included.

Would you be so kind as to point it out?

Thanks so much...

{... A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ...}

While normally there could be an implication from "security of a free State" that it had defensive weapons of war in mind, it is a logical fallacy to assume the one reason they list is then the only reason they had in mind.
It does not matter what the reasons were.
The only salient point is the conclusion, which is that there were to be NO federal firearm laws at all.
Any law, whether good or abusive, infringes.
So since the point in general of all the amendments was to divide jurisdiction between states and federal, then the 2nd amendment specifically denies any and all federal jurisdiction over firearms.
Which makes sense.
What you may need in territories with dangers like snakes, bear, pirates, or other dangers, should be very different than what you may need in NYC.
There is absolutely no point, need, or foundation for any or all federal firearm laws.
Its like speed limits and traffic laws.
Sure there could be some convenience of uniformity if they were done nationally, but they aren't, and it works fine.
There is no need or reason for any federal firearm laws, and the fewer the central laws, the better.
It is clear the founders waned zero federal firearm laws.
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
33,458
Reaction score
17,674
Points
1,915
So since the point in general of all the amendments was to divide jurisdiction between states and federal, then the 2nd amendment specifically denies any and all federal jurisdiction over firearms.
I would love if you showed where this is true and how it works with other than the 2nd A??

are you saying that due process can be changed in states and people executed without trial??
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,435
Reaction score
4,635
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
its in the first four words,,,

A "well regulated militia" implies individual home defense as well as municipal posse duties, and not just national defense.
Remember there were no police back the, so the militia just means armed responsible citizens.
It does not at all imply the National Guard as some now like to believe.

But again, when one reason is listed, it is a logical fallacy to assume that is the only one.

Here is the exlanation:
{...
Fallacy of the Inverse (Denying the Antecedent)
p→q
¬p
∴¬q

One premise is a conditional statement, the other premise denies the antecedent, and the conclusion denies the consequent.
...}

It would not be a logical fallacy "if and only if" the need for firearm rights were for an armed force of citizens soldiers.
But since there were no police back than and lots of local threats, clearly the intent was not to deny other needs for an armed population.
But the need for citizen soldiers is also sufficient.
That alone makes all federal weapons laws not only illegal, but incredibly stupid.
We absolutely need and should want every single household to be armed.
Every unarmed household not only increases crime, but is just irresponsible.
Arms will at some point be needed by anyone.
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
33,458
Reaction score
17,674
Points
1,915
A "well regulated militia" implies individual home defense as well as municipal posse duties, and not just national defense.
Remember there were no police back the, so the militia just means armed responsible citizens.
It does not at all imply the National Guard as some now like to believe.

But again, when one reason is listed, it is a logical fallacy to assume that is the only one.

Here is the exlanation:
{...
Fallacy of the Inverse (Denying the Antecedent)
p→q
¬p
∴¬q

One premise is a conditional statement, the other premise denies the antecedent, and the conclusion denies the consequent.
...}

It would not be a logical fallacy "if and only if" the need for firearm rights were for an armed force of citizens soldiers.
But since there were no police back than and lots of local threats, clearly the intent was not to deny other needs for an armed population.
But the need for citizen soldiers is also sufficient.
That alone makes all federal weapons laws not only illegal, but incredibly stupid.
We absolutely need and should want every single household to be armed.
Every unarmed household not only increases crime, but is just irresponsible.
Arms will at some point be needed by anyone.
so you have no proof and are just gonna make shit up,,

got it,,,
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,435
Reaction score
4,635
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
I would love if you showed where this is true and how it works with other than the 2nd A??

are you saying that due process can be changed in states and people executed without trial??

The easiest example is religion.
(It is really a little too easy so is cheating a bit, but I will do it anyway because it is so easy.)

{... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ...}

Freedom of religion was only a restriction on the federal government. Several states at that time, like Quaker Pennsylvania and the Puritan Connecticut definitely did have state religions.
There has never been any legal restriction on state or local infringement on religion until the 14th amendment.

What I am saying is that if states and municipalities CAN make laws to handle a situation, then the implication of the founders was that the feds should not have any jurisdiction then. Federal jurisdiction was only for what states and municipalities could not do themselves, like immigration, national defense, facilitate interstate commerce, post office, etc.

Which is why the federal war on drugs is totally and completely illegal.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$70.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top