AK-47 Videos
March 3rd, 2008 by joe
Since the topic of gun videos just came up in this thread, it seems appropos to provide a few pretty entertaining ones now that everyone is in the mood.
First, you have to watch this to get the whole AK-video Zeitgeist (and if you are not a gun person, the context here is that it can easily take 45 minutes to clean a regular rifle if you are not an expert):
-How to clean and strip your AK-47
Then, you are ready to enjoy this superb work of art. (Go watch it right now - it’s not what you’d expect). Guy shooting an M16 with the killer soundtrack by MIA (”paper planes“) and AK-47 cleaning video as the oboe or sax part. Mind infesting stuff, my friends, tell me if you can’t watch it over and over (headphones recommended, or else blast the volume).
-M.I.A. how to strip an AK-47
-(based on this video)
A US soldier describes a captured weapon - pretty cool.
-New AK-47 captured from dead Insurgents, Look at what they shoot at us
What a gun!
-Trying to kill an AK
Interesting wonk stuff…
-AK 47 vs M16
And from the Darwin department
-if you want to see something absolutely ASININE beyond words, check out the javelin catcher. And I have to say, though perhaps not from sadness, I cannot explain the fact I cry when I watch this. And I cry a little more each time. I literally have to clear the drops from my glasses. This one grows better with repeated viewings. I wonder how many of you will react the same way ….
Finally, not a video but this is just really funny if you can get over the, uh, legal aspects.
-AK-47: Semi-Auto to Full-Auto Conversion
This entry was posted on Monday, March 3rd, 2008 at 3:32 am and is filed under 2nd Amendment, Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:43 am
The javelin catcher got my vote for the Darwin award. The announcer needs to be shot in his reproductive organ so as to stop him from contaminating the gene pool. More chlorine please.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:29 am
“Did you see it?”
“No.”
“Did it hit the plate?”
“I don’t THINK so”
Tears! Contorted muscles! Urination! Dead giveaway was the first round hitting 50′ in front of the guy! I love the laughing at the end.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:21 am
I had to watch it twice to realize how utterly ridiculous it is (when I noticed where the first round hit). That’s when the tears started …
March 3rd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
You would think the javelin catcher would have noticed the puff of dust 5′ in front of his right leg. Tears? Blank amazement is more like it. We are doomed as a species.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Jacob,
Put your mind at ease, buddy. NO ONE is really that stupid. The puff of dust is LONG after the shot. The hit was almost instantaneous! The laughing at the end? If it wasn’t staged then you are right. GOD help us!
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:55 pm
It is funny.
The comparison between the two guns beyond the fact that they are both battle rifles is not worth much.They really are two different machines. Their ability to convert to fully automatic fire is where their likeness ends.
5.56 ( .223 ) v. 7.62 ( .308) Hmmm, I wonder what the differences might be ?
The semi-auto .223 is often referred to as an assault weapon by the anti-gunners and the press.
It is often called a ” high powered ” rifle by the same crowd. This is why I am very cautious to compare the .223 to the .308 in that it becomes guilty by association. When the 5.56 is viewed in comparison to the 7.62 it wrongly becomes a defacto ” high Powered round “, of course it is not. Remember, we can’t even use the .223 to hunt deer ( thin skinned game animal ) in Virginia. That is how ” high powered” the .223 is.
Americans have been in love with the .223 for a very long time. It is our plinking round. Out west it is the favorite of most varmint hunters.
I like the .223 for a number of reasons. It is both fun and cheap to shoot as well as being very accurate from the right gun.
I am looking at the Stainless steel Ruger Ranch Rifle with black stock and red dot in .223. This is a great all round rifle.
An armed society is a polite society.
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
You must be right, ACT, thanks for pointing that out. So these guys go from being the biggest idiots in the world to comic geniuses - because it is pretty darn funny.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Be careful of your backstop when shooting a .50 cal..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ABGIJwiGBc
G. Stone, Yes, when the sniper was around, ATF kept showing what appeared to be a 220 Swift on TV, I guess because it is much more sinister looking than a .223. The other “terrible” rifle is the .50 cal, the antis say it should be banned, but the reality is that the .50 cal long range rifle was developed by civilian enthusiasts, and later adopted by the military. I too have eyeballed this same Ruger.. but in this class, I want a .30 M! Carbine..
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Dan:
I too like the .30 Carbine
That rifle is a favorite of many in the U.S. Spec ops community.
The .50 was in the news today. Hawaii was going to ban the rifle and all .50 cal ammo. The bill did not pass or was bottled up in conference. They stated that five-o requested the ban out of fear someone was going to take out an airliner.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:10 am
Oh, you guys and your fancy rifles …
I guess the reason I would most consider the AK is because the ostensible rationale is home protection and the indestructible tool with omnipresent ammo available seems like a good choice. Cheap, too.
March 4th, 2008 at 6:38 am
You like the AK because deep down, Joe, you’re a revolutionary.
March 4th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Power to the people.
IMHO an M1a is a far better choice that the AK. The round and rifle are far more accurate. The ammo is cheaper than most. Furthermore it comes typically with the U.S. armed forces preferred peep-sight as opposed to the more typical blade site. This is not a small matter.
Some will talk about how one can leave an AK47 in a the mud of a rice paddy pull it out and start shooting. I don’t grow rice, and the weapon while it is operating can not be considered anything close to accurate. It is as much a noise maker at that point, as a weapon.
As for the 50 cal being used to take down an airliner, I have fired the Barret. Are you kidding?
March 4th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Boys, boys! Stop comparing apples to oranges. You are all over the spectrum with your arms. The AK would be considered a sub-machine PISTOL in its true form. That is why they made the SKS and Dragonovs-for the longer ranges. M1 carbine would be closer to the AK. The AR is for open plain and not good close. The power of the .223 is formidable (as is the 22-250) but it has no kinetic energy. That’s why the bigger and SLOWER the round, the more damage and knockdown done. I know of no all-around arm that is good long and close, bush and plain. That is the reason why we need more guns. To close the gaps in scenerios.
The .50 cal would have to be an exacting shot to bring down ANY aircraft. They put 50’s on our earlier fighter aircraft but they got to shoot a lot of rounds at the enemy. Swiss cheese just wouldn’t be swiss cheese with just one hole in it, would it?
March 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Excellent points, ACT.
And bearing in mind that we each are probably not going to be able to own all the guns we would have wished to own in this life - well, except for you of course - choices have to be made.
If home defense is the priority, we would cover the major bases with handgun(s) and shotgun, and then make sure there is at least a rifle around - for principle’s sake and perhaps the SHTF scenario such as Katrina or civil disturbance. If you are only going to be able to get one, and funds are limited, the AK seems like a good choice. At half the price or less than an AR, it seems like the only choice. Plus there’s the cool videos …
March 4th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Che-Joe,
Do you need a permission slip for Linda? Besides the cool videos, I can invision you and the AK. You want that AK. You need that AK. I will even go so far as to buy you a box of rounds for YOUR AK. Just remember that the guy in MY backyard late at night is ME! Viva la revolucion!
March 4th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Joe,
“And bearing in mind that we each are probably not going to be able to own all the guns we would have wished to own in this life”
Total bummer of a thought Joe. I just want you to know that as I type, Jack is more than likely weeping at his desk in a fetal position. Look what you have done, where is your optimism!?
March 4th, 2008 at 11:58 am
ACT,
I always considered both the M14 and AK-47 to be assualt rifles. That the AK47 should be classified as a Machine pistol is arguable. The weapon is simple to large for that. Sub Machine Gun like the Thompson or Shmeiser(sp?) is a better comparison than the M1 carbine. The M1 carbine used a pistol round, the AK47 round while innacurate is not a pistol round. Finally the AK is not in the same boat as the Uzi or HK, both of which are 9mm.
As for one round/weapon being able to cover all the bases, you are spot on. Which is why all militaries use mission specific firearms for thier infantry. Still with all this in mind, the M4 carbine does make a decent attempt at covering many of the basis, the limitations of the 5.56 not withstanding.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
“As for the 50 cal being used to take down an airliner, I have fired the Barret. Are you kidding?”
Only a fool would believe that it is possible to hit an airliner going 500 mph at an altitude of 30K+ feet with a 50 cal. If you don’t believe me, go outside and try to keep a telescope on a cruising plane..
The AK and the M1 are different tools for different jobs. Lets really juice things up, I think the FN-FAL is a superior arm to the M16, the AK, and the M1 ! Comments ?
March 4th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Dan,
“Only a fool would believe that it is possible to hit an airliner going 500 mph at an altitude of 30K+ feet with a 50 cal. If you don’t believe me, go outside and try to keep a telescope on a cruising plane..”
that is the current position of 5-O, and yes, they are fools for saying it.
I was comparing the AK47 to the M14, the M1 was not in the mix.
As for the superiority of the FN-FAL, it typially fires the 7.62 NATO which is the .308. I prefer that round to the 5.56mm (.223). The FAL has some sensititivity to find sand, but so does the M16.
Why are you so high on it? I a declare my ignorance in the matter.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Dopes. They’re not worried about an airliner at 30,000′ going 500mph, but one taking off or landing, of which there are about a zillion in Hawaii, island hopping. They never get anywhere near 500mph or 30,000′.
An armed society might be polite, but you’re likely to be polite amidst mass carnage. I know you RWN’s like to have the masses live in fear. Easier to govern.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Thanks for the insight, Sanity. That explains all the mass carnage we’re living in.
March 4th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Insanity,
Speaking of dopes, have you ever tried to shoot something moving around 200mph? That is the typical landing speed of a jet aircraft while taking off and landing.
Not to mention most such weapons use a scope. With your massive intellect, full of insight would you care to tell me if you know whether a scope makes a shot at a moving target easier or more difficult? I await you answer with baited breath.
By the way you dork, the real means of making the huddled masses live in fear is through ignorance. Considering the howling ignorance of your last statment, you must be huddled in a fetal position under your wet bed.
March 4th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Sanity :
I had to step over so many bodies this morning at 7-11, I ruined my shoes. oh the carnage.
You live in a state where there are 150,000 people carring a concealed weapon on a daily basis. Where is the carnage ?
There are approx 2.5 million people in America lawfully carrying a concealed handgun on any given day. Where is the carnage ? The only carnage is amidst the clutter in your head.
The odds are that you come in contact with someone lawfully carrying a concealed handgun 2 times a week. Somehow, I don’t know how, but those people whoever they are, resist the temptation to shoot you. They also passed 15 banks and 20 convenience stores all the while fighting that primal urge to bust in and yell ” This is a Stick Up ” while blasting innocent bystanders for shits and giggles. There is no carnage inflicted by law abiding citizens. Carnage when it exists is inflicted by those outside the law against unarmed innocents who have fallen victime to not only an evil doers bullet, but laws rendering them helpless. Laws, I might add, supported and advocated for by the Sanitys of the world.
No one in this conversation believes you can hit an airliner at 30k feet. The reason we know this, is we actually own and use firearms. Unlike yourself, we actually know what end of the tube the round comes out of. You on the other hand are a perfect example of someone who should stay away from all firearms. People who think with their hearts are not only dangerous but often have holes in the top of their feet.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Let me restate, only an idiot would believe that you can hit a plane going 100-200mph at an altitude of a couple of hundred feet with a 50 cal.I shall assume that “shooting down an airliner” means in flight.
The only carnage I see is a few brain dead liberals who refuse to think for themselves.
March 4th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
I wonder if Sanity ever considered the meaning of how gun control is working across the river in DC. They know how to put on some righteous carnage across the river, let me tell you.
March 4th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
haha, Dan reminds me of Had Enough. Where is HE, anyway? I guess he just had… oh never mind
March 4th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Hey, General, that reminds me I found some info for you
http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1591_3503_4654—,00.html
When you’re ready to take the plunge, there is more useful material here
http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=39
Hope this helps.
March 4th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Greg, Greg, Greg, Greg, Greg! I’m not real sure about your last comment. Could you tell me how you REALLY feel?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Dan,
I like the FN. That is why it is so widely used. My favorite will always be the M1 Garand with the M14/M1A as close seconds. I just think that .30-06 or 8mm are a wonderful round.
Jacob,
Granted that the 7.62 Russian isn’t really a pistol round it also doesn’t have the power for a rifle. Like shooting .357 out a barrel less than 6 inches. You just don’t use all the cartridge. The AK would be more carbine than anything but, still, it ain’t no rifle. It is a good carnage gun and if Joe could swing his body quick enough and could reload like a bunny with 500 rounds he may have a chance to bring down Sanity?’s vacation plane….if it was still parked in the hanger! Ha! Ha, ha, ha!
March 5th, 2008 at 6:46 am
ACT,
Now, now, now, don’t go making suggestions that us law abiding types start shooting up vehicles. Ol’ InSanity might go and blow yet another gasket. Say something even more retarded than his pathetic ‘but one taking off or landing’. Not that I mind seeing him say retarded things, I am just worried that the rest of us will eventually die laughing if he does it too frequently.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Jacob,
Sorry. I just like to have fun. Especially at the likes of Sanity?’s expense. Think of the alternative if we took their garbage too seriously. What a depressing world we would live in. I think his witlessness (is that a word Joe?) is great entertainment and I need to feed his “insanity”.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Act, From all your posts your affinity for the Garand was apparent. You should find an M1 empty ka-ching to use as a ring tone
March 5th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
ACT, Dan,
IMHO the 30-06 is the best hunting round bar none for the North American continent. You can take everything down from White Tail, to Bull Moose. The round is almost as accurate as the .308 Winchester, but the larger case gives you a little more range on how hot to make the load and how heavy you can make the projectile.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Dan,
Cool idea! It is definitely a disticnt sound and would make a great ringtone. Thanks.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:50 am
OK - this is worth a new post. the Easterner is hating on law-abiding gun owners. I tried to post the comment below but I couldn’t get them to accept it. I’ll try again later, but in the meantime, I thought I’d unleash Greg, Joe, Jacob & Co. on them.
http://www.easterner.com/cgi-bin/storyviewnew.cgi?059+section+Opinion
________________
To the Editor:
I agree with one thing you said: concealed weapons permits should only be issued to sane, responsible, law-abiding people who know how to use them. But there are a lot of human
beings in that category and it isn’t the government’s job to determine whether my reason for wanting to carry a weapon fits their definition of legitimate, as long as I obey the law.
Parenthetically, for those who don’t know, Governor Kaine has already vetoed the bill concerned. He obviously shares your bias towards an unarmed and under-informed citizenry.
But, an article this generally wrongheaded bespeaks a bias against law-abiding firearm owners. Can someone explain precisely what is is about today’s vaunted society that makes the Second Amendment null and void in your opinion? Are we smarter than people of the last generation? Less prone to crime? Find me the statistics to back that up, will you? Maybe we are dumber or more prone to crime and shouldn’t be trusted with weapons? Try backing that one up based on some real data?
Before using your keyboard to cast concealed carry permit holders as a bunch of irresponsible shoot-’um-up teenagers from some highly dramatic black-and-white, you could have looked at the facts. There are some 155,000 concealed carry permit holders in Virginia. They must be over the age of twenty-one and pass a safety and usage test before receiving their permit. Studies show that concealed carry permit holders are seven times LESS likely than the average citizen to commit a crime.
You ask why this bill is necessary and suggest a few reasons it might have advanced this year. Clearly, the bill is not about arming more people - it does nothing toward that end. The bottom line reason for this bill is that it makes sense. Just like it makes sense to prohibit the drinking of alcohol while carrying a gun or driving, it makes sense that someone who is not drinking alcohol and is obeying the law should be allowed to carry their firearm into a family restaurant and pretty much anywhere else, for that matter. It is frankly ridiculous that someone who is open carrying (for which there is no permitting process or safety test) can carry in such a location legally, but not a trained permit holder.
Your inflammatory opinion piece seems designed to incite fear among citizens who don’t own or understand owning a weapon. But consider this, if we were going to see a repeat of “OK Coral,” why hasn’t it happened already? This bill doesn’t loosen the restrictions on obtaining a concealed weapons permit, it simply applies some common sense to where you can legally carry it. Murder and mayhem are not the product of law abiding gun ownership, but of criminals who have no problem breaking the law anyway.
The only person who should be allowed to ban a weapon in a privately owned public facility is the owner of that facility. And the government should rarely prohibit the carrying of weapons by law-abiding gun owners in publicly owned places. There are good reasons why law enforcement should be the only people with guns in jails, police stations, courts and other secure facilities. But parks, libraries, government offices and the like are all places where law-abiding folk should be free to protect themselves.
And yes, criminals are attracted to “gun-free” zones. They are considered “crime-safe” zones. Cho may have still tried shooting up Virginia Tech even if guns had been allowed on campus but one armed professor could have stopped the carnage. That’s what happened at Appalachian State when a disgruntled student turned shooter — he did kill three people — but three students, one of whom retrieved a gun from his car, subdued and handcuffed the killer, holding him until police could arrive; thus preventing a far more massive tragedy.
Let’s have some freedom of choice on this issue. You don’t think law-abiding citizens in “today’s society” should carry guns for self-defense? Well, you have the right not to do so, but don’t infringe on my constitutional right to protect myself, those I love, and maybe, just maybe, even you.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Thank you, LC, this does deserve to be a new post. I will do it tonight as soon as I can shake this pesky day job from my calendar. Nice work.