• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are pro-2nd Amendment?

Are pro-2nd Amendment?


  • Total voters
    69
Here's where the possibility came about. The police in that instance were taken by surprise and thus under equipped for the mission. The AK-47s didn't actually give the bad guys an advantage, the rapid fire was effective in suppression of the police, but they probably still had the basic uniform with level 1 BPVs, most rifles will penetrate those vests. By the time reinforcements arrived the criminals were "dug in" so they had a tactical advantage, more cover, etc. It wasn't the weapons they used but rather it was the will to hold off the underarmed and surprised police.

the cops went to local gun stores and were given high power hunting rifles -the only people killed in that shootout were the two scumbags
 
You mean two guys who used ILLEGAL machine guns after they PREMEDITATED felony robbery and attempted murder? GUNS THAT WERE BANNED UNDER FEDERAL AND CALIFORNIA LAW?

yeah those laws were effective-only the scumbags had that stuff

But, Mr.Turtle...those weapons were banned...so therefore no criminal could have used them to commit any crime...because the criminal would have known that those weapons were banned and out of respect for the law, would therefore not have acquired them for his felony, logically.
 
But, Mr.Turtle...those weapons were banned...so therefore no criminal could have used them to commit any crime...because the criminal would have known that those weapons were banned and out of respect for the law, would therefore not have acquired them for his felony, logically.

It is amazing the "thought process" of some on the left. people who would never own an illegal gun generally aren't going to shoot up half of Los Angeles. ON THE OTHER HAND, those who have no problem cranking off 300 rounds at police officers and other members of the public tend to have a mindset that ignores lower level criminal statutes
 
It is amazing the "thought process" of some on the left. people who would never own an illegal gun generally aren't going to shoot up half of Los Angeles. ON THE OTHER HAND, those who have no problem cranking off 300 rounds at police officers and other members of the public tend to have a mindset that ignores lower level criminal statutes

It's amazing how you just mowed over my point without any consideration of what was actually being said. Just lower the brow and full steam ahead. You don't think if the two robbers who got those guns illegally that there wouldn't be more and worse types of crime if you made them all legal as you suggested? That wouldn't be logical at all. It'd be WW3 out there between Law Enforcement and the crazy criminals with the average, peaceful citizen paying the price. Some people need fast cars others need big guns to replace their bang, bang :mrgreen:
 
It's amazing how you just mowed over my point...

True. The whole "those guys make me worry about firearms being legal!" was obliterated in substance and theory. Try a different example.


Do you remember the North Hollywood shootout where the two guys who had the body armor and automatic weapons held off police? That's what scares me about having unlimited access to firepower for your average cuckoo individuals or even criminal gangs.

Or are you going to claim that you meant, literally... "I am against unlimited access to firepower for cuckoos and gangs".
 
Last edited:

You literally never make any sense too me that's why I have no idea how to answer you. It's almost as if you're saying "apple sauce or sail boat" over and over. But I can attempt it.

The whole "those guys make me worry about firearms being legal!" was obliterated in substance and theory. Try a different example.

You mean the robbers were obliterated? Couldn't have been my statement because I haven't seen a literate response yet.

Or are you going to claim that you meant, literally... "I am against unlimited access to firepower for cuckoos and gangs".

Uhhh..yes and you're not? What's to stop them from going to the local Gun Mart and purchasing an arsenal if more lethal hardware is legalized?
 
The Second Amendment makes the Americans the most feared people on earth by government.

It is the last holdout__When Americans allow government to disarm them, the world will fall to the globalists.

7+ billion people will be at the mercy of heavily armed governments__Attempts of resistance will mirror Tiananmen Square.

Totalitarians do not like to return freedoms to the people who traded them for promises of a better life.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 4 | 1989: Massacre in Tiananmen Square
"The demonstrations in Tiananmen Square have been described as the greatest challenge to the communist state in China since the 1949 revolution.

They were called to coincide with a visit to the capital by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, by students seeking democratic reform."
 
the cops went to local gun stores and were given high power hunting rifles -the only people killed in that shootout were the two scumbags
I forgot how that ended to be honest, I knew the basic details. It's like I said in an earlier thread though, scope+Accuracy at distance = advantage.
 
the starting point for the argument as to what is too much has not been reached

clearly all law abiding citizens should be able to own what our own tax dollars supplies CIVILIAN law enforcement agents.

once we all can own submachine guns, 50 caliber long range "target interdiction" rifles and real assault rifles (all of which have been determined to be useful for CIVILIANS to protect them selves with in URBAN environments by various GOVERNMENTAL units) we can then argue whether NON MILITARY voters should be able to own belt fed heavy machine guns, automatic grenade launchers, hand held anti-tank rockets, STRELAS, and RPGs

If you take the Second Amendment at its word, and don't try to interpret and edit it, then civilians do indeed have the right to own any and all of the above.

So, I suppose anyone who is anti ownership of rockets, etc, must be anti second amendment.
 
Here's where the possibility came about. The police in that instance were taken by surprise and thus under equipped for the mission. The AK-47s didn't actually give the bad guys an advantage, the rapid fire was effective in suppression of the police, but they probably still had the basic uniform with level 1 BPVs, most rifles will penetrate those vests. By the time reinforcements arrived the criminals were "dug in" so they had a tactical advantage, more cover, etc. It wasn't the weapons they used but rather it was the will to hold off the underarmed and surprised police.

I agree the police were way under equipped but the AK type rifles were using large drums to hold big capacity of armor-piercing rounds and their caliber is high enough to penetrate car doors, which they knew. They weren't that dug in if you saw the video of the fire fight, they were right out in the open a lot wearing 40lbs of body armor, ducking behind vehicles off and on. It took ankle level shots to drop one and a wrist/hand shot on the other who shot himself after that. Also they had taken phenobarbital to calm their nerves before the robbery. So I wouldn't say it wasn't the weapons but it was a combination of will and preparation.
 
I agree the police were way under equipped but the AK type rifles were using large drums to hold big capacity of armor-piercing rounds and their caliber is high enough to penetrate car doors, which they knew.
First off, drums, magazines, etc. are not that much of an advantage. Capacity is what it is, shot placement is always critical, if you have 40 rounds or 100 rounds and cannot accomplish your goal of suppression or hitting on target you are simply wasting ammunition. Rate of fire is not the advantage people think it is, you lose accuracy and limit your options to "lucky shots". AK-47s are not "super weapons" they are semi-accurate, they do however have durability, but they fire what amounts to a small rifle round, it's a large .22 for the most part which is actually smaller than a typical large game hunting rifle. Where the danger comes in is the tumble effect of the round, not the power behind it considering most hunting rifles have a larger size and more powder loaded.
They weren't that dug in if you saw the video of the fire fight, they were right out in the open a lot wearing 40lbs of body armor, ducking behind vehicles off and on. It took ankle level shots to drop one and a wrist/hand shot on the other who shot himself after that. Also they had taken phenobarbital to calm their nerves before the robbery. So I wouldn't say it wasn't the weapons but it was a combination of will and preparation.
If they were able to hold position they were "dug in", that comes from tactical prep. this is not a cheap shot at the police, considering they had to go on the best information available. Basically these clowns had the will to cause damage and the arms choice was a secondary consideration. Like TD stated, they were stopped using common hunting rifles, if the AKs were "super weapons" that would not have been a possibility.
 
First off, drums, magazines, etc. are not that much of an advantage. Capacity is what it is, shot placement is always critical, if you have 40 rounds or 100 rounds and cannot accomplish your goal of suppression or hitting on target you are simply wasting ammunition. Rate of fire is not the advantage people think it is, you lose accuracy and limit your options to "lucky shots". AK-47s are not "super weapons" they are semi-accurate, they do however have durability, but they fire what amounts to a small rifle round, it's a large .22 for the most part which is actually smaller than a typical large game hunting rifle. Where the danger comes in is the tumble effect of the round, not the power behind it considering most hunting rifles have a larger size and more powder loaded. If they were able to hold position they were "dug in", that comes from tactical prep. this is not a cheap shot at the police, considering they had to go on the best information available. Basically these clowns had the will to cause damage and the arms choice was a secondary consideration. Like TD stated, they were stopped using common hunting rifles, if the AKs were "super weapons" that would not have been a possibility.

The drums they had were holding 75-100 rounds. I know about placement when I asked my gun crazy friend what's the most dangerous handgun and he said "the one I can hit a major artery or organ with". One assailant was stopped by SWAT using an AR-15, not hunting rifle. I saw an episode of Lock N' Load with R. Lee Ermey comparing the AK-47 with the M16 and though the M16 had the accuracy it definitely did not have the wallop on the center block.

View attachment 67120807

From left to right: .50 BMG, 300 Win Mag, .308 Winchester, 7.62 Soviet, 5.56 NATO, .22LR

You're not really comparing the 7.62mm 3rd from the left to the far right .22 Long Rifle?

I think they definitely considered their weapon choices. They had five different assault rifles modified with high capacity, armor piercing rounds. These nut jobs were loaded for bear.
 
Last edited:
The drums they had were holding 75-100 rounds. I know about placement when I asked my gun crazy friend what's the most dangerous handgun and he said "the one I can hit a major artery or organ with". One assailant was stopped by SWAT using an AR-15, not hunting rifle. I saw an episode of Lock N' Load with R. Lee Ermey comparing the AK-47 with the M16 and though the M16 had the accuracy it definitely did not have the wallop on the center block.

View attachment 67120807

From left to right: .50 BMG, 300 Win Mag, .308 Winchester, 7.62 Soviet, 5.56 NATO, .22LR

You're not really comparing the 7.62mm 3rd from the left to the far right .22 Long Rifle?

I think they definitely considered their weapon choices. They had five different assault rifles modified with high capacity, armor piercing rounds. These nut jobs were loaded for bear.
The 5.56 is the AK47, it looks bigger because it carries a larger powder load and is extended at the tip, however it is roughly the size of a .22, the 300 Winchester, .308, .306, etc. are more common rounds used in hunting, and are larger than the 5.56. The common .22 is a varmint/small game round, whereas the 5.56 is more of a large target round but typically is less effective at stopping than the larger rounds with the same bore. The reason the AK does more damage than the M16 is that it has more tumble, i.e., it has a looser rifling which reduces spin at the muzzle of the gun the bullet flops around more as it loses velocity so it is more of a tearing/bouncing hit on target unlike the drill action of similar weapons. It's kind of like would you rather be stabbed with a sharpened or a blunted knife. Again though, the police were out gunned, the criminals had no legal right to the weapons or the armor and yet had both, this actually makes for the argument that it could happen to any of us, the difference is people are limiting our choices arbitrarily using flawed logic about "danger factors" of military weapons, the facts don't bear out that these weapons are more dangerous, rather that they have different characteristics.
 
The 5.56 is the AK47, it looks bigger because it carries a larger powder load and is extended at the tip, however it is roughly the size of a .22, the 300 Winchester, .308, .306, etc. are more common rounds used in hunting, and are larger than the 5.56. The common .22 is a varmint/small game round, whereas the 5.56 is more of a large target round but typically is less effective at stopping than the larger rounds with the same bore. The reason the AK does more damage than the M16 is that it has more tumble, i.e., it has a looser rifling which reduces spin at the muzzle of the gun the bullet flops around more as it loses velocity so it is more of a tearing/bouncing hit on target unlike the drill action of similar weapons. It's kind of like would you rather be stabbed with a sharpened or a blunted knife. Again though, the police were out gunned, the criminals had no legal right to the weapons or the armor and yet had both, this actually makes for the argument that it could happen to any of us, the difference is people are limiting our choices arbitrarily using flawed logic about "danger factors" of military weapons, the facts don't bear out that these weapons are more dangerous, rather that they have different characteristics.

The AK-47 fires the 7.62 according to this source AK-47 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. And I'm not even the gun enthusiast,, lol

And the 5.56 slug from that photo appears 3 times the size of the .22 cal. I don't know LMR you're a fairly bright cookie to keep trying to wiggle out from this one. My boots on your throat and I'm not even putting pressure. No amount of word garble is going to clear up these errors.

I'll admit crooks are going to acquire things a lawful citizen won't but if you make it too easy every bean brain can load up. I'm for the 2nd but not unlimited and never will be it's just not realistic.
 
Last edited:
The AK-47 fires the 7.62 according to this source AK-47 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. And I'm not even the gun enthusiast,, lol
There could be a 7.62 variant, not sure as I really don't like the AK platform so I'm not fully invested in it. Wiki is open source so it's quite possible someone doesn't know that the typical AK round is comparable to the M16 Carbine, which is the 5.56. The Ak74 for my knowledge is the larger 7.62 round.

And the 5.56 slug from that photo appears 3 times the size of the .22 cal. I don't know LMR you're a fairly bright cookie to keep trying to wiggle out from this one. My boots on your throat and I'm not even putting pressure. No amount of word garble is going to clear up these errors.
I'm not wiggling out of anything, the cartridge is larger due to a higher powder load, the bullet is elongated and has a tip instead of the ball 22 round being compared. For instance my father owns a high powered rifle that fires tipped hunting ammo, it's got a larger cartridge, however my pistol has a short cased cartride, fires a larger round with a higher powder load, typically the rifle round will look larger but the .40 I'm firing has the larger round, however the rifle is much more accurate at longer distances and because of it's barrel characteristics will do more damage at further distances. The cartridge can be decieving.
I'll admit crooks are going to acquire things a lawful citizen won't but if you make it too easy every bean brain can load up. I'm for the 2nd but not unlimited and never will be it's just not realistic.
There is no excuse to outright ban small arms, there is no ballistic evidence, psychological evidence, or even legal evidence to support prior restraint.
 
First off, drums, magazines, etc. are not that much of an advantage. Capacity is what it is, shot placement is always critical, if you have 40 rounds or 100 rounds and cannot accomplish your goal of suppression or hitting on target you are simply wasting ammunition. Rate of fire is not the advantage people think it is, you lose accuracy and limit your options to "lucky shots". AK-47s are not "super weapons" they are semi-accurate, they do however have durability, but they fire what amounts to a small rifle round, it's a large .22 for the most part which is actually smaller than a typical large game hunting rifle. Where the danger comes in is the tumble effect of the round, not the power behind it considering most hunting rifles have a larger size and more powder loaded. If they were able to hold position they were "dug in", that comes from tactical prep. this is not a cheap shot at the police, considering they had to go on the best information available. Basically these clowns had the will to cause damage and the arms choice was a secondary consideration. Like TD stated, they were stopped using common hunting rifles, if the AKs were "super weapons" that would not have been a possibility.

Speed is nice

accuracy is fatal



attributed to Wyatt Earp
 
Speed is nice

accuracy is fatal



attributed to Wyatt Earp
I'll quote again for truth. You're the guy to ask, are there 7.62 AK47 variants? It's not my preferred platform but I always understood it was 5.62 only and the 74 was the 7.62.
 
There could be a 7.62 variant, not sure as I really don't like the AK platform so I'm not fully invested in it. Wiki is open source so it's quite possible someone doesn't know that the typical AK round is comparable to the M16 Carbine, which is the 5.56. The Ak74 for my knowledge is the larger 7.62 round.

I'm not wiggling out of anything, the cartridge is larger due to a higher powder load, the bullet is elongated and has a tip instead of the ball 22 round being compared. For instance my father owns a high powered rifle that fires tipped hunting ammo, it's got a larger cartridge, however my pistol has a short cased cartride, fires a larger round with a higher powder load, typically the rifle round will look larger but the .40 I'm firing has the larger round, however the rifle is much more accurate at longer distances and because of it's barrel characteristics will do more damage at further distances. The cartridge can be decieving. There is no excuse to outright ban small arms, there is no ballistic evidence, psychological evidence, or even legal evidence to support prior restraint.

I own a dozen AK variants-Chinese, Hungarian, Russian, Egyptian, Bulgarian and Polish

AK 47, Type 56 (China) and AKM

762X39

same caliber as the SKS rifle is chambered in


AK-74 shoots a 5.45 which is slightly smaller in diameter than the 223 or 5.56 NATO round

a 22 LONG RIFLE is the same diameter but has a much smaller shell while the 5.56 is a NECKED DOWN CARTRIDGE meaning the diameter of most of the shell is far wider than .22/100s

the NATO 7.62 round is much longer than the SOVIET 762 round which are essentially around 30 caliber (.30/100s)

the AK 74 round was designed to be the SOVIET answer to the 55 grain NATO round used in the original M16 (m193 ball IIRC). it was a 53 grain bullet

the CURRENT NATO round is a heavier 62 grain bullet that requires a faster twist barrel to stabilize it-1X9 Minimum rather than the 1X12 in the original M16 the reason why the Military issue A2 and M4s are 1X7 is to optimize the tracer round
 
I own a dozen AK variants-Chinese, Hungarian, Russian, Egyptian, Bulgarian and Polish

AK 47, Type 56 (China) and AKM

762X39

same caliber as the SKS rifle is chambered in


AK-74 shoots a 5.45 which is slightly smaller in diameter than the 223 or 5.56 NATO round

a 22 LONG RIFLE is the same diameter but has a much smaller shell while the 5.56 is a NECKED DOWN CARTRIDGE meaning the diameter of most of the shell is far wider than .22/100s

the NATO 7.62 round is much longer than the SOVIET 762 round which are essentially around 30 caliber (.30/100s)

the AK 74 round was designed to be the SOVIET answer to the 55 grain NATO round used in the original M16 (m193 ball IIRC). it was a 53 grain bullet

the CURRENT NATO round is a heavier 62 grain bullet that requires a faster twist barrel to stabilize it-1X9 Minimum rather than the 1X12 in the original M16 the reason why the Military issue A2 and M4s are 1X7 is to optimize the tracer round
I had it backwards then. Still, this came about from the argument that the Aks are too powerful by another poster, either way it's a false logical premise in that both of these rounds are light assault and less powerful than many common hunting rifles readily accessible in the U.S.
 
the general AK 47 variants involve

1) country of manufacture

2) receiver construction


3) stock configuration-standard fixed, under folder, side folder

The receivers were milled and stamped-stamped being far cheaper to make and while purists will say that machined risers are better for the serious shooter (which is why the banned from Import "POLY TECH LEGENDS" made in China are craved by collectors-they had the thickest milled receiver of any thing available in the USA) some experts claim the stamped receivers are more durable in full auto since they aren't as rigid and give with the full auto rather than cracking

THe original AK 47 was milled, the far more common AKM was a lighter rifle with a stamped receiver. Those were replaced in the soviet arsenal by the AK 74 with the higher speed much lighter bullet

Common variations include the TYPE 56 a chines copy of the soviet rifle, the TANTAL (a polish copy often in 545X39)

some of the best made are the BULGARIANS imported to the USA by ARSENAL (milled and stamped receivers in 762X39, 545X39 and 556 NATO) the MAADI of Egypt-which is very close to the original AK 47, and the common Romanian WASRS ( the cheapest AK variation in the USA generally)

THe best available in the USA are the Ishmash (SAIGA) rifles that have been converted (to meet 18 USC 922 C rules) back to semi auto AK 103 specs by RED JACKET or KREBS. The ARSENAL are general seen as being in the same league. The WASRS are the cheapest.

another brilliant variation of the AK platform is the FINNISH Valmet. The VALMET receiver when Paired with a COLT M16 barrel served as the original platform of the famous Israeli GALIL assault rifle. Valmets are generally the most accurate of the AK variations
 
I had it backwards then. Still, this came about from the argument that the Aks are too powerful by another poster, either way it's a false logical premise in that both of these rounds are light assault and less powerful than many common hunting rifles readily accessible in the U.S.

the most popular big game cartridge in the USA-the 30-06 was our standard battle rifle and Light-to medium Machine gun round in WWI (P17, and the A3-03, Browning 30 Caliber Machine gun, the Garand of WWII, the BAR) and it is far more powerful than the 762 COMBLOC round.
 
the most popular big game cartridge in the USA-the 30-06 was our standard battle rifle and Light-to medium Machine gun round in WWI (P17, and the A3-03, Browning 30 Caliber Machine gun, the Garand of WWII, the BAR) and it is far more powerful than the 762 COMBLOC round.
I did know that. The M1 Garand is an incredible weapon BTW. If I can ever get my FFLIII as a collector I want to obtain a B.A.R. 40 LMG, beautiful gun.
 
Back
Top Bottom