/hobby/ - Hobbies

Entertainment, Education, Games, etc.

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/k/ - Guns in general Anonymous Comrade 02/03/2020 (Mon) 11:24:19 No. 5906
Just don't talk about gun control
What are some easy guns to use that I can get easily?
>>5907 .40 Gloc, light weight, easy to clean, powerful, ease of use. Good for beginners.
>>5908 what if I wanted to limit myself to a sovjet arsenal?
Which rifle is the best for beginners
>>5921 Something that shoots .22 LR, cheap ammo, no recoil, can be used in indoor ranges. Good for learning.
(73.74 KB 800x477 fYuS7AT.jpg)
Explain pic related. Just. Why?
>>6077 Meant to fold up for concealed carry of an SMG
>>6081 > conceled carry SMG Why not an uzi then? > foldable, light, new standard bullets Idiotic. Foldable? Why is it THAT big of a fucking advantage if you can... disassamble the others if you wanna save space... you already have to fiddle with this one when you fold it open... Light? So what? It's an SMG! If you can only hold handguns but want the dakka, there are options available for that... Maybe the issue with bullets of the new standards WOULD be an issue that this thing can solve... but wait 2 years for your "old" SMG manufacturer to come out with the previous models that confine to the standard. Seriously... this is a gun only for incels... made by possible incels.
>>5910 Honestly that’s dumb, don’t limit yourself for some LARP learn how to actually use guns and gain proper knowledge before hand
(1.65 MB 280x210 066.gif)
I figure this might be a good place to ask as any. So I'm a writer who wants to write gunfights in his story in a plausible manner (not realistic because the story does include fantastical elements) so I have a few questions. >What would happen if someone fired off an entire magazine of a Type 56 AK when engaged in combat in an enclosed space (interior of a cargo ship in this case) where no-one participating has hearing protection? Does everyone just go deaf from it? >How hard is it for someone with no practical experience (but plenty in theoretical) in firearms to handle the recoil of a 7.62x39 round? What about in full auto? >Is .38 special enough to stop a man in one shot? If not can you recommend a better revolver cartridge? >How big is the danger of getting hit by ricochet when in a tight corridor? >How do you actually perform a speed reload on an AK? >How do you tell which of the casings inside your revolver's chamber are spent ones so you can remove them individually instead of dropping all of the rounds out of the chamber? Is there some indicator on the primer to tell you that it's been used? >Is obrez just a meme or is it actually useful in close combat? Oh yeah, and the setting is in the 90s so any recommendation for operator gear for maximum operating for that period? Kevlar vest and tactical rig recs would be especially appreciated. Thanks in advance for your time.
(63.71 KB 1280x510 hk_416_a5_saeg_airsoft_01.jpg)
>tfw live in Germany and getting a gun here takes a while, up to a year >thought about going through the process Eh, I'm too lazy. I'm just going to post a pic of my favorite carbine.
>>6644 Can one of you LARPing sissies give this man an answer already?
>>5910 Unless you live near Eastern Europe or you're looking to become a collector, don't. But if it's that important to you, get a CZ-75 instead: 9mm, comfy trigger; a great starter carry gun depending on the variant you get.
(29.07 KB 655x397 boolet.gif)
(76.68 KB 1155x1155 top break mechanism.jpg)
>>6644 First some general advice, whatever firearms you use (if you identify them specifically) you should research enough that you know the basics of how they work and any distinct quirks. One thing you should also do is go on youtube or some other site and watch videos of people using those guns, including loading and unloading. You should also look up some kind of crash course on firearm usage and safety to know how it works so you don't write goofy shit like a character scratching their head with the muzzle of their pistol. >What would happen if someone fired off an entire magazine of a Type 56 AK when engaged in combat in an enclosed space (interior of a cargo ship in this case) where no-one participating has hearing protection? Does everyone just go deaf from it? Not permanently deaf, but there would definitely be hearing damage. Hearing loss is more the kind of thing you get over time from repeated eardrum abuse. But you'd get temporary hearing loss for anybody near the gun. Surprisingly small calibers can cause you do go mostly deaf for at least few seconds if you're close enough, like the person firing the gun. >How hard is it for someone with no practical experience (but plenty in theoretical) in firearms to handle the recoil of a 7.62x39 round? What about in full auto? Full auto in any caliber will fuck your aim completely if you have no hands-on experience. Even with experience, it will make it impossible to aim unless it's a fairly small caliber. You don't fire on full auto to aim your shots. You generally just point in the direction and hope the hail of gunfire makes up for poor aim, and that's if you're actually trying to hit someone. Most of the time full-auto is used for suppressing fire (something like 99% of bullets fired in combat don't hit anybody) - you are effectively doing area denial by making it too deadly to occupy the space. The space being anything from an open are to poking your head out from cover to shoot back. You use full auto to pin people so that someone can reposition to get a better shot on them, or just pray one of the bullets hits. If you are spraying full auto trying to kill someone you are usually wasting bullets and fucking up your aim for no reason. The exception would be something like a submachine gun or a machine pistol that makes up for small caliber stopping power with a larger number of hits. You would still be better off with semi-auto for that because the tradeoff of inaccuracy and lack of control usually negate any benefit from rate of fire (if you are good you can fire semi-auto very fast), and the farther you are from the target, the more you're going to miss. In practice burst fire is more useful for actually hitting a target than full auto. You can't really get more than a few shots off before your aim goes to shit, even with small calbier. Also to note, guns heat up a lot when fired, especially rapidly. The heating of the barrel and other mechanisms causes some miniscule warping that reduces the accuracy of the gun itself, independent of the user's ability to aim. >Is .38 special enough to stop a man in one shot? If not can you recommend a better revolver cartridge? Depends on a lot of factors, like where you hit, the grain in the round (how fast it fires basically), the kind of bullet, if he's wearing protection of any kind, etc. For an average unarmored civilian shot center of mass yeah. For someone with training, high on adrenaline, it depends on whether the bullet hits a vital organ or a major blood vessel. It probably won't stop them instantly, but pretty fast. This is the kind of thing where you have some wiggle room because the body is so intricate that you see all kinds of weird shit with bullets barely missing a kill shot. Just don't rely on this too much. If you want to make sure people die in one shot, they should be shot with hollow points and I'd bump it up to .45 or so. The .38 special is the round of gangsters who are not so much in gunfights but are assassinating each other across a table in a restaurant. In a firefight you want the other guy to drop ASAP because every second is more time for him to shoot you back. >How big is the danger of getting hit by ricochet when in a tight corridor? Depends on the ammunition and the material of the corridor, and how much of an angle the projectile hits the wall at. If it's metal or something you are liable to get ricochets, but with a lot less penetration because the bullet is probably tumbling instead of flying true. If you're talking about rifle rounds, they would probably punch through the wall unless hitting it at a shallow angle, meaning the target has to be pretty far away. >How do you actually perform a speed reload on an AK? You can find videos of people reloading on the internet, probably better than hearing someone describe it. IDK what a speed reload is when you have a magazine-based rifle, though. Those reload pretty fast just reloading normally. >How do you tell which of the casings inside your revolver's chamber are spent ones so you can remove them individually instead of dropping all of the rounds out of the chamber? Is there some indicator on the primer to tell you that it's been used? Yes, when the revolver fires, the hammer strikes the casing. Typically a revolver uses center-fire rounds, which have a distinctive (sometimes 2 visibly distinct metals) primer cap in the center of the rim. In an un-fired cartridge you will see a flat primer. If it's been fired, there will be a dent where the hammer struck to make it fire. If the ammunition is rimfire, there's no visible primer, but there would be a dent on the back of the casing still, usually along the rim. Additionally, like mentioned above, shit will be fucking hot. You can get (usually mild) burns from touching fired casings. Do be aware that different revolvers load and unload differently. Usually the older ones are the ones made to unload individual bullets and those aren't very conducive to selecting your rounds to fire (see the classic colt single action army, the cowboy gun). Modern revolvers usually have swing-out barrels and unload casings all at once by pushing part of the cylinder against all the casings to slide them out together. These may or may not have the space for you to grab the back of the casing and pull it out manually. If you have a character who loads a revolver with specific rounds and selectively fires them, you might want them to use a break-loading revolver (pic related - a BB gun, but illustrates the point), which is more specialized but also more useful for such a purpose. These usually poke the casings out (or use springs to eject) making it easier to select individual rounds. Bear in mind they are less sturdy than other styles and usually for smaller caliber as a result, although Smith and Wesson made a .45 like this. They're also not really used any more, so this is more appropriate for some kind of custom-designed weapon, as is the need to fire specific individual rounds from the cylinder. >Is obrez just a meme or is it actually useful in close combat? It's sensible enough assuming it makes sense in context - if mosins (or similar rifles) are common enough where a character is it might be easier, but generally handguns are available enough to just get one of those. Any shortened barrel will drop the gun's power and accuracy, and using a pistol with bolt action is not very practical, especially at close range where firing the short barrel gun is most effective.
(31.24 KB 388x445 pistol aiming correction.jpg)
>>8697 >>6644 Oops, forgot to answer this part of the question: >How hard is it for someone with no practical experience (but plenty in theoretical) in firearms to handle the recoil of a 7.62x39 round? Rifle rounds have the benefit of being fired by rifles, meaning the bigger the gun the more mass to absorb the recoil. They also often have shoulder stocks and other designs that help. Firing one shot at a time is not bad with a round that size and typical rifle that uses it (by design). It's (bigger) pistols, shotguns, and full auto where the kick is an issue (especially to a noob). If you're firing single shots as a newbie you are more likely to get sore from the kick than the kick itself to fuck up your aim. Newbie aiming problems are more a factor of not having muscle memory than recoil. There's various things you can do wrong and have to learn to do right, like pulling your aim to the side when you pull the trigger. This is much much less of an issue with rifles than pistols because you use both hands steadying your aim at different points. >Oh yeah, and the setting is in the 90s so any recommendation for operator gear for maximum operating for that period? Here's a big list of '90s firearms, including the year and country. If you want to make characters look silly, give them the P90. https://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/guns-1990-1999.asp
>>5906 If you are American, a STANAG-compatible 5.56 rifle is a must, the AR is it right now. And of course, a 9mm pistol. Also do not forget the most important tool of them all, far more important than ammo or the individual weapon: people People power is what makes a military unit a unit. Do not neglect to bring friends with guns and train small unit tactics. Fatties and weaklings do not belong. One heart, one mind, one fist.
(4.86 KB 363x139 images.jpeg)
(130.81 KB 300x300 ak_vs_556-300x300.png)
What type of ammo will be more viable in the future when living in Eastern eu? 7.62 or 5.56?
>>9453 Still in EU? Probably 5.56, but it's good to cross-train and go for whatever the police/military are carrying in your area. Any NATO nation should stay 5.56/7.62NATO. However, even Russia and other nations switched too 5.45, which is a very neat round, comparable to 5.56. I say learn whatever your country uses first, and cross train with whatever is commonly used around you. 9mm is also GOAT.
Gun control
>>9476 is bad
>>9513 >>9476 is necessary
(1.62 MB glow.mp4)
dont mind me, just checking in...
>>9528 shut the fuck up liberal
>>9699 >liberal <t.someone who has not read Castro Don't be a burger "Weapons for what? (¿Armas, para qué?) To fight against whom? Against the revolutionary government, that has the support of the whole people? … Weapons for what? Hiding weapons for what? To blackmail the President of the Republic? To threaten to break the peace here? To create organizations of gangsters? Is it that we are going to return to gangsterism? Is it that we will return to daily shootouts in the capital? Weapons for what?" http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/1959/esp/f080159e.html Havana, 8 January 1959
>>9705 >Weapons for what? (¿Armas, para qué?) To fight against whom? Against the revolutionary government, that has the support of the whole people? If you have the support of the whole people you don't have to worry about them having guns. The guns function as a deterrent to keep the government from transgressing against the people. Even libs understand this. Castro's argument here is divine right tier.
>>9705 t. retarded tankie Castro was wrong. It's that simple. These aren't prophets and their word is not without question. A government that has the support of the people will only be defended by those people.
>>9710 >>9712 >Castro was wrong <Muh gunz Cuba still standing and being a model country for the world proves otherwise. >If you have the support of the whole people you don't have to worry about them having guns <If you don't have anything to hide you don't have to worry about surveillance That is the most asinine arguments yet, as if people are static automatons with unquestioning programming and not dynamic beings who can have doubts or be deceived into violent mob action. When YOU lead a successful Guerilla War and win a revolution you have space to talk smack about Castro being wrong or not. If the people support and trust the government then they don't need to have guns. >Divine right tier <muh no gunz is rightwing! This is why I argued against gun memes about "muh rightoid gun takers" aimed at /pol/, because, newfags like you take this at face value. Guns are not toys they are not valuable possessions or needed tools. They are weapons for killing, and unless you hunt for survival or know there is a war on your doorstep you do not need personal gun. No gun will protect you from the force of an army, not even if you stock up for decades. At best you'd just end up killing more people and changing nothing. >The guns function as a deterrent to keep the government from transgressing against the people Talking about Divine right arguments, this Burger-tier argumet that is essentially "we'll THREATEN the government to submit to us" is the most asinine thing in the world. If you have to threaten the government then you're not under a revolutionary government and you're not in a functional system. Ruling by fear does not produce good results in the long run >muh tankies Fuck off, you rad-lib morons don't have a fucking clue. >These aren't prophets and their word is not without question No, they are men with decades of experience and who understand war and weapons far better than you.
>>9734 >what was the Bolivian coup?
>>9736 >What is superior military force making armed insurrection in the 21st century irrelevant Any MILDLY successful revolution or coup right wing or leftwing in the past 3 decades has been decided by military presence. If the military sides with the coup, it will succeed, if it does not, they will not. Even the 1917 Revolution relied on the White Army soldiers turning on their commanders and forming the Red Army. Donetsk and Lugansk only began to succeed in their revolt against the Ukrainian Junta by capturing military tech and supply depots and using that to start fighting back before rebuilding the economy enough to purchase more weapons and supplies and create a functional organized system. Now look at Hong Kong. The military only began using tear-gas and other standard riot-control methods months later, even while the "protestors" were using gasoline bombs and other improvised weapons as well as hand-guns, some of which were stolen from police they mugged. Despite this Hong Kong is no closer to a coup than Detroit is.
>>9734 >Cuba still standing and being a model country for the world proves otherwise. It's not a model country, and it speaks to your liberalism, that you think it's problem-free or something. You're astoundingly stupid. >If you don't have anything to hide you don't have to worry about surveillance Except this applies to institutions not individuals, or are you saying that secret deals and programs should also be part of a socialist government and open government is for right-wingers? >When YOU lead a successful Guerilla War and win a revolution you have space to talk smack about Castro being wrong or not. Castro's ability to win a conflict is irrelevant to the gun issue. These do not follow one another. Also, I've been in a war, and you haven't, so I would know much more about armed insurgencies than you. >They are weapons for killing, and unless you hunt for survival or know there is a war on your doorstep you do not need personal gun. You do not get to dictate what I "need". And self-defense is a valid use of a weapon. >No gun will protect you from the force of an army, not even if you stock up for decades. At best you'd just end up killing more people and changing nothing. And yet we have Afghanistan. They managed to kill their share of well-armed individuals, and we now leave them alone. It's almost like you have no idea how insurgencies work. Afghanistan has a government, by the way, and with all the US funding, they still had to make a deal with the Taliban. >Fuck off, you rad-lib morons don't have a fucking clue. You're a tankie, and in denial. >No, they are men with decades of experience and who understand war and weapons far better than you. No. I have a decade of experience on more weapons and systems, theory, and its application. Castro is a dead man that had his war in the long past. Not only can his ideas not apply to the current battlefield, but it's dangerous to think that way. Those wars are over. Our wars are now, and they do not look like Castro's war. Not that you would know. >>9761 Still parroting 20th century history, I see. Or did you not notice that Venezuela's armed militias keep the military in line? Do you not see that this is what frustrates an invasion attempt? Stay-behinds and insurgents are a nightmare for any modern military. You can't win with just tactics, and your ideas on gun control are so liberal, that I don't even know how you're calling yourself a communist. You have no perspective outside of the books you read on 20th century history, which is good for information, but is far from the reality you live in today. You are not qualified to talk on the topic of war.
>>9766 >It's not a model country, Yeah sure its not, which is why its HDI rivals the USA in every positive regard, and has massive popular support. Ordinary people will fight you for insulting Castro. >liberalism <supporting Cuba Do you hear yourself? >you think its problem-free Don't put words in my mouth liar >astoundingly stupid ironic to hear from a "muh gunz" fag >this applies to institutions not individuals Its the same concept, stop nitpicking, you're not addressing the crux of the argument at all. >Castro's ability to win a conflict is irrelevant to the gun issue Except it is relevant since gun policy was hardly supportive for Castro's guerilla war, yet he still succeeded, because guns weren't the main aspect of victory, it was popular support and competent military strategy >I've been in a war, and you haven't <t.internetwarrior Plenty of people have BEEN in a war. Syrian refugees have been in a war. Average grunts have been in a war. This doesn't give you the whole picture. Have you LEAD a war? A military campaign with long-term political goals of your own? >you have no idea how insurgencies work Tell me how well an insurgency would work in the USA or any country that isn't unstable and with a high HDI. >US still had to make deal with Taliban Because Afghanistan is on the other-side of the planet and isn't home turf. US soldiers there aren't fighting for themselves or their people, they're fighting because Commander X - following overseas orders - tells them to execute Mission Y, the only agency an individual soldier there has is their direct actions during combat or patrols or whatever. >You do not get to dictate what I "need" <fuck you got mine! A burger mentality. Do you understand what a collective decision means? >self defense is valid Personal gun ownership in the USA seems to only ENCOURAGE violent crime. The USSR's low levels of violent crime like murder and armed assault compared to the USA, demonstrates this all the more. Regardless, no home needs a machine-gun for self-defense. Moreover you're speaking in general terms when the specified situation is society under a revolutionary government, and thus a people's government. Bourg gun control =/= socialist gun control. >we have Afghanistan <imperialist invasion is the same as fighting a civil conflict or an individual going gun-ho against the government. Amazing logic... seriously, stop intentionally misinterpreting my words, it only discredits you more > in denial. The irony is great >tankie If you're using a word, understand its meaning before spamming it. >Castro is a dead man A dead man who fought wars, commanded a country under embargo and political pressure under threat of a Cold War and survived over 600 assassination attempts and was an avowed communist and people's man, especially at the moment of the quote. There are plenty of soldiers who know how to handle weapons who are idiots, just as there are those who do not who are intelligent and vice versa, Vietnam is a good demonstration of that, with some Vietnam Vets being utter cads and others being reluctant fighters who fought for their men bravely in an otherwise unjust war. Being a soldier means you understand the experiences of war, but does not automatically make you the end all be all of military and weapons. >Not only can his ideas not apply to the current battlefield You're taking his words out of context however. 1) His words refer to Post-revolutionary conditions 2) His words are logically sound 3) His words are based on experience 4) His words are made more valid by the ever developing systems of modern warfare and are demonstrated as such repeatedly. If people truly want revolution weapons are not the deciding factor in that decision. And after the revolution is fought, there is no point in continued weapons use except to DEFEND the revolution, rather than fight civil conflict. Marx's famous quote about guns means that as a CLASS the proletariat should be armed, as in the class should have arms at it's disposal for purposes that vary depending on the situation. Under a capitalist state, the proletariat should remain armed in order to keep open the possibility of a future revolution. Under a socialist state, the proletariat should be armed in order to resist foreign or domestic capitalist aggression. This does not mean everyone being able to freely buy lots of weapons for no specific purpose. >Still parroting 20th century history <Donetsk and Lugansk are 20th Century I followed that conflict quite closely. They did not start off with ANY weapons at all. The most people had was an AK or two brought back as souvenirs from being soldiers. >Venezuela's armed militias keep the military in line? <equating indivudal ownership with a militia A militia also keeps its members inline with collective ownership of most weapon stocks Moreover the Venezuelan military is largely in support of Maduro, as has been demonstrated since it had several opportunities to CRUSH any pro-Maduro militias if it wanted to. >Do you not see that this is what frustrates an invasion attempt And you're confirming my point. >your ideas on gun control are so liberal I did not state my ideas on gun control whatsover. I stated that gun control itself is necessary. If anything my ideas on gun control follow the Soviet model: In the 1930s and 1950s after conflict and fear died down, commercial ownership of shotguns and hunting rifles was re-started for urban and rural areas, with there being restrictions in the 1960s following the use of civilian handguns in the hijacking of several passenger jets by terrrorists. Regardless, throughout the entire USSR training with guns was MANDATORY in school for all children and men went through 2 years of conscripted service. I.E. the entire population had Basic Military Training. Having guns and being untrained is more dangerous to yourself than having few guns but knowing how to use them, as US accidental gun-death rates show. In other words training and limited gun ownership trumps chaotic ownership of weapons and no formal training. I know an ex-marine. He and his team were challenged by the best local paintball players (who were gun owners too) to a match. They beat those "pros" easily. Because the military teaches vectoring and tactics far better than anything one can teach themselves. >You can't win with just tactics Without them you can't win either. >insurgents are a nightmare for any modern military In third-world countries that lack infrastructure maybe. In any developed country like the USA any HINT of insurrection is monitored and quick to be snuffed out. The internet makes this phenomenally easy, to where even /pol/ and /b/tards can track down the most obscure locations in hours >You have no perspective outside of the books Wrong. You know nothing about me. >Muh 20th century The 20th century was 2 decades ago, not two centuries ago. Moreover information as old as a millenia remains useful today. Moreover if you bothered to actually read my argument and not nitpick like a lib, you'd notice that my entire argument is precisely based on the fact that this is not the 20th century and that is why this personal firearm obsession is obsolete when even the average SWAT team is likely to be better armed and armored than most civilians, and that arming yourself to the teeth is just a good way to be shot to pieces and villifed in the eyes of the majority of the people. >You are not qualified to talk on the topic of war. Yet neither are you. Moreover I base my statements not on my personal opinion, but on the knowledge, experience and thoughts of people and experiences that are certainly qualified in that regard, both modern and historic. TL;DR: The proletariat being armed doesn't mean everyone gets to rock about with whatever weapons they want. That was Castro's point. And while I may not have military experience, Castro definitely did and I refer to the conclusions drawn of both recent and historic military experiences that set precedent. There is no argument to be had here unless you're a gun nut. End of discussion.
>>9766 >>9736 I find it amusing how my first response gets "muh Bolivian coup" as the only response, ignoring all my points and arguments, and when I pointed out why that's a fallacious argument you fell back to A) insults and calling me both a liberal and a tankie in contradictory fashion B) pulling the "I was in the military" card (on an anonymous forum) C) Trying to attack my sources and providing flawed "counter-examples" D) ignoring my main argument and replying to my sarcastic orange-texts or small excerpts of the argument This is pathetic and foolish.
>>9771 You don't have any arguments other than muh Castro. And my military experience was brought up only in response of you using Castro as an authority. If we're going to compare modern military theory, I outclass Castro by far, mainly because he's dead and his revolution took place in the fucking 50s. You also have not pointed out why my counterexamples are flawed, whereas you're stuck in the 20th century, thinking this somehow still applies, while also taking the contradictory positions that guns are too much for the revolutionary state to handle, and that any modern military would crush an insurgency. You've also compared the state to an individual, and overall it's obvious you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. You have no idea what weapons are for, how to utilize them, nor the reasons why citizens might want to keep them. You're a liberal that likes to LARP as a communist. Kill yourself, but without a gun, because you don't "need" it.
>>9773 >You don't have any arguments other than muh Castro Except I do. I referenced at least 2 modern conflicts. policies of the Soviet Union and argued against the idea of violent INTERNAL reinforcement. I also referenced this against historic conflict and situations. All of which you ignored, seeing how you could not have read all what I wrote in the short time you wrote you pathetic response. >my military experience was brought up only in response of you using Castro as an authority Except that you use it in reference to arguments that Castro and his quote had no bearing on until you brought it into that. You've moved the goalposts several times by now. >You also have not pointed out why my counterexamples are flawed I did, See >>9770 you blind, skim-reading fuck. Learn to scroll up. >compared the state to an individual Nice shifting of goal posts, by using a sarcastic counter-example to attack my argument when you ignore the main argument. Splendid discourse, Goebbels would be proud of such a talanted smear effort. >ou're stuck in the 20th century And you ignore my eamples of the 21st century yet again, bravo. >still somehow applies The 20th century was 2 decades ago, and many military and socio-economic tactics are used today despite their age. The Sniper Sies formation was developed in WW-2 by Zaitsev and still used today in many conflicts. The CIA methods of "color revolutions" have changed little since 1949, and still function to an extent as shown in Ukraine, Lybia and Syria recently. Even Venezuela would have fallen prey had it not been fore-warned. >You're a liberal that likes to LARP as a communist Sure, sure >muh gunz >KYS yes, yes, now go mount that bayonet dildo of yours to destress. >You have no idea what weapons are for Amazing. You contradict yourself so often I don't know if you're a troll or a genuine fool.
>>9775 >Except I do. I referenced at least 2 modern conflicts. Both of which are funded and supplied by a foreign power. Apparently people still needed weapons to fight a war, and were even given professional contract soldiers. Nice, but that isn't in any way relevant to the idea of whether or not people should have a right to defend themselves. >policies of the Soviet Union and argued against the idea of violent INTERNAL reinforcement. The soviet union sucked and there is always violent reinforcement internally. What do you think police powers and the military are? >All of which you ignored, seeing how you could not have read all what I wrote in the short time you wrote you pathetic response. You're a little college book worm, not someone who knows anything about weapons, how conflicts happen, or how to fight one. That much is obvious. Why should I take the time to read point by point when you're arguing against a fundamental human right of self-defense? >Except that you use it in reference to arguments that Castro and his quote had no bearing on until you brought it into that. Yeah, I brought it in reference to you saying that when I lead a guerrilla movement, then I could say he was wrong. This is idiotic, and I have much more military education that Castro could have ever dreamt of, especially pertaining to modern conflict. Castro's ability to lead is also irrelevant when discussing a fundamental human right like self-defense, yes, even if you agree with the government. >I did, See >>9770 you blind, skim-reading fuck. Learn to scroll up. It's more of the same bullshit, and cannot justify your stance. >Nice shifting of goal posts, by using a sarcastic counter-example to attack my argument when you ignore the main argument. Splendid discourse, Goebbels would be proud of such a talanted smear effort. You used it as an argument. Don't try to retreat from your stupid position. And nice job calling me a Nazi, when your'e the one that wants to keep people at the mercy of the state. >And you ignore my eamples of the 21st century yet again, bravo. Yeah, and a light reading shows that they are in no way comparable to an insurgency, since it's simply a conflict fomented by a foreign power. In many cases it's outright Russian contract soldiers fighting on their behalf. How stupid are you? >The 20th century was 2 decades ago And you were talking about the 1950s. How long ago was that? >The Sniper Sies formation was developed in WW-2 by Zaitsev Lol, wat. You think snipers didn't know about FFPs before Zaitzev? Are you stupid or do you just swallow propaganda? >The CIA methods of "color revolutions" have changed little since 1949, and still function to an extent as shown in Ukraine, Lybia and Syria recently. I can't speak to CIA efforts, but I can tell you that COIN operations have changed a lot in the last 20 years. You have no idea what you're talking about in regards to this. Again, nothing you say trumps the right of the people to keep weapons for their self defense. Not even Castro himself rising out of the grave to tell me that the stupidity of "Well if the government is for the people, then the people don't need guns." You're fucking retarded. Armed populations keep the government in check. Socialism isn't about building a dictatorship. Yes, Castro was wrong, the USSR sucked, and no amount of quotes by some dead Cuban is going to change this.
>>9821 >Both of which are funded and supplied by a foreign power <Donetsk <funded by a foreign power Yeah you've really bought into the coolaid haven't you? >people still needed weapons to fight a war You missed the point entirely, brilliant >The soviet union sucked Yeah at this point I can tell that you'e either a /pol/yp or a troll. Neither worth my time. >always violent reinforcement internally You still don't understand. For all your supposed experience, your reading comprehension is abysmall >You're a little college book worm Again you don't know who I am at all. >anything about weapons Wrong >how conflicts happen Wrong again. Your analysis of conflicts has been demonstrably incorrect >more of the same bullshit Nice no argument > Don't try to retreat <I'm not moving goal posts you are <no u pathetic >COIN operations have changed a lot in the last 20 years They have essentially the same principles as they did. Approaches have changed slightly to fit the differences in culture of modern day but the same base methods are used, and it is blatantly obvious >nothing you say trumps the right of the people to keep weapons for their self defens Nothing you say is an argument against any of my points you absolute ponce. Your entire rant of ad hominum is addressing a literal strawman because you have a chip on your shoulder and an ironically narrow understanding of world functions. You cannot see the forest for the trees, or simply prefer not to. >nice job calling me a Nazi <everything is about le nazis If you cannot understand what propaganda is and what a social reference is without connecting it directly to "ur a nazi" then you're a fool. >your'e the one that wants to keep people at the mercy of the state You have no understanding of what you're talking about. Do you understand what Dictatorship of the Proletariat implies? I don't think so >That much is obvious So obvious that you cannot refute a single point and resort to attacks on my character with wild accusations. >a light reading shows that they are in no way comparable to an insurgency >a light reading being a skim-reader does not justify your ignorance. Moreover insurgency was hardly the crux of the argument you goal-post shifter >it's outright Russian contract soldiers fighting on their behalf 2 years into the conflict? Yes, initially no. You cannot choose a single excerpt of a 5 year conflict and try to claim the entire conflict was like that >how stupid are you less so than you >talking about the 1950s 1959, and the Cuban revolution is reflected in multiple other revolutions and movements throughout the Cold War and after the fall of the USSR. Nitpicking is not legitimate method of debate. >You think snipers didn't know about FFPs before Zaitzev Considering that prior to WW-2 Sniper combat was still relatively undeveloped and pre-war sniping was limited to lessons of trench warfare, yes. >muh propaganda Considering that even the highly anti-communist wikipedia admits that "sixes" formation was created by Zaitsev, I doubt that. >f the government is for the people, then the people don't need guns Ah yes, please continue to take my argument out of context, anything to defend your gun fetish >Socialism isn't about building a dictatorship Socialism's primary action is to establish the Dictatorship of the proletariat. >Muh USSR sucked HDI, and other socio-economic data as well as Individual memoirs and accounts state otherwise >Castro was wrong I think not as would a good number of people and I would not suggest you risk saying that in Cuba, although on second thought, go ahead. >no amount of quotes by Castro is going to change this for me FTFY Its rather obvious that you are adamant in your dogma and go out of your way to deny and deflect anything that may undermine it. I won't continue arguing and simply wish ou a good day, and hopefully a wakeup call.
>>9822 what a fucking cuck of a dude jesus
>>9647 >Guys I posted the funny video!!! I'm one of you now guys!!! Fuck off with the cop-jacketing, nigger.
I'm considering a glock for target shooting. Recommendations?
>>9734 <If you don't have anything to hide you don't have to worry about surveillance What the fuck is this argument? That the state deserves something from the populace? That something will be lost of great importance if the people decide to abolish it? That the will of the people needs to be stymied to protect the state? Are you even a leftist?
>>9954 >What the fuck is this argument The point of the argument is that just as with government invasion of privacy, the opposite is also true. Mass armament (as if ready for war) is provocational, you might as well be fucking Sparta. If, after the Revolution, Proles must cling to guns in the paranoid idea that "can't let the guvement do something bad!" there is no point to the Revolution, no security, no peace, nothing. >muh state >abolish it!!! Ankids and their "just skip to stateless systems !!!!" are morons >are you even Leftist? See >>9705... and the rest of the arguments on the thread you knee-jerk reaction idiot.
Looking for something cheap, something like a PSA AR-15. Any other suggestions/alternatives if this isn't really that good?
>>10322 PSA AR-15 seems to be the best option for low budget specially if you order the parts sepretly and assemble it by yourself, I think that would be like 350 bucks
>>9883 Genuinely go to a range and try them out,idk how many people I know bought a glock off a recommendation then hated it. G19 btw
Anyone living in riots/protesting areas in us? How’s it going for you guys, here it’s been tense since it started specially when militias started coming in
>>10372 Hello glowwie
Lame I know but since I live in the UK does anybody have a recommendation for a good Air Rifle?
>>10377 tbh i wish i was cool enough to be a glowie, i am just trying to bring some life to this thread. >>10381 i'd suggest watching youtube vids, some of those small game hunting ones are interesting
Holy shit, I went to the gun range for the first time ever and shot about 50 rounds. I was nervous as hell and flinching in the beginning, but near the end started easing up a bit. I rented a cz 75. I had a few questions though. I thought the safety could be engaged with the slide locked back, but it didn’t work. Also with the safety engaged the slide would not rack back? How come the slide has to be released before the safety can be turned on? Also, I had a DA/SA and can vaguely remember, but I think the safety can be turned on while the gun is in either SA mode or decocked in DA mode. Can someone confirm? I think the gun I rented didn’t have a decocker, but during the range I decocked it manually to practice. Also I didn’t realize but it took quite a bit of strength to rack the slide back and lock it. I’m sure I was doing it wrong as I was kinda blocking the ejection port.
>>9647 I want to rig up some glowing targets so I can practice shoot at glowies, how does that stick figure in the video glow?
>>10323 >>10322 The problem with the PSA rifles is that most of them don't come with chrome-lined barrels. For high volume of fire, this is a must, but that is an edge use-case. Remember also that you should get a: sling light optic In that order, unless you're using NVGs, in which case, buy that with a PEQ-15 or something. The russian stuff does not have limits on how strong it can be, so import and use at your own leisure.
>>10507 Do not worry about quirks so much. Some weapons can be placed into safe at any point, and some cannot. Learn the weapon you are using first and foremost. Big picture, then details to fill in that picture. You are still at the big picture stage, so stick to that for now. If you are flinching, go for something smaller and do a lot of dry-fire practice. Dime/washer drills are the bread and butter of dry-fire practice. Get on that first, and then worry about the other stuff. And remember to gather others that can do the job. Don't just gather people you like, but those that have the physical and mental fortitude for combat, and while you're at it, find out if you have it in you as well.
Got the solution to the AK vs AR debate: An AR chambered in 7.62x39
>>10516 Those are actually quite terrible. If you're in the US, go for an AR. Same goes for pretty much any NATO country where they are popular. If you live in fucking Mongolia or some shit, then yeah, get an AK somehow. But here's the thing, most people here aren't looking to join a military organization. They're just looking for self-defense. If that's the case, then just get yourself a good, concealable handgun.
>>10515 Oh really, is there any reasoning for why some can engage safeties at any time and others not, any examples of a few? On the cz 75 I rented once the safety was on the slide would not rack back either and was locked. I think it could be on in both sa and da mode with hammer cocked back or decocked. However, there was a “half cocked” option on the hammer as well. What’s the purpose of the half cocked option? The dime drill seems cool, but the range is kinda expensive and I don’t really want to dry fire there much of the time lol.
>>9476 Look what you did.
>>10525 As for the reasoning, I wouldn't be able to tell you with any kind of certainty. I'm not a firearms designer, nor have I ever been involved in procurement of that level. As for weapons that can be placed on safe, the M9 can be placed on safe at any time, and the hammer should go to half cock when this is done. You will not be able to manipulate it while the slide is back for mechanical reasons. As for dry-fire practice, don't do it at the range, do it at home. Even a CO2 airsoft pistol can help you with this, but obviously my experience is only with real firearms, so this is second-hand information. If you can, get yourself your own weapon. Pistols are great, but harder to handle for most people. That being said, if that's your end-goal, start there and build up your skills. Get training if you can, and remember that you'll get better little by little.
For all you 'gun-smiths' Take a lesson from the PPS-43 and its simplicity. The AK is a great assault rifle but as demonstrated with cheap Norinco crap, you either take the Warsaw Pact/Soviet stuff or don't bother. Moreover the PPS is even simpler and just as rugged than the AK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRn9uqkKkOc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGGguFuFln4 https://www.scribd.com/document/224115207/Soviet-PPS-43-Submachine-Gun
Thinking about getting my Mosin professionally cleaned, should I?
>>10660 How bad is it? It's a nice milsurp gun, but don't throw money at it.
>>10653 >not the Owen You're making it too complicated...
>>10668 >Owen a decent gun but the top mounted ammunition is a pain for anything remotely like a picattiny rail. You could modify it to be placed underneath but that's more of a hassle than just making the PPS (2.7 work hours with 6 kg of scrap metal and a metal lathe.
>>10667 The bolt is a bit sticky, and there are little patches of cosmoline on it. I'll probably just clean it myself, though.
>>10674 Good shit. Do you own just the Mosin?
>>10676 Yep, along with an air gun. Thinking about getting some more milsurp one of these days. Maybe a yugo m48 or a SKS, maybe even a Mosin PU or carbine if I could find it.
>>10828 Good stuff. I would collect more milsurp, but I can never justify it to myself.
Should we buy a registered or unregistered gun? In my state it’s legal to own an unregistered gun but it has to be kept at home and cant be transported anywhere. The question is would it be more advantageous for you to register the guns so the glowies know you are armed/not to mess with you easily, or to have an unregistered weapon so you can get the drop on people instead? Seems like there are a few places online you can buy unregistered guns. Any risk in doing so? How do we check an unregistered weapon wasnt used for murder or something?
>>10886 Wait, are you outside the US? Sorry, not familiar with any of this. In either case, gun tracing is trash and doesn't work. Never register your weapons if you can avoid it without breaking the law. Stay within the law as much as you can.
You know what the world needs? A guide on the construction of firearms, and I'm not talking instructions on how to build such and such a gun. Every single book on building x, y or z has listed the tools and time it takes to build the gun and each part, but there's no overarching archive of these parts and the tools and time required to build them. There could be three SMG manuals posted right now requiring entirely different parts and labour, but until you've read them all you don't know if you have the correct tools to produce any of them. There's no reason you can't attach a rifled barrel from a Prof Parabellum manual onto a Luty, but without reading both you wouldn't know. Taking apart the manuals and arranging them so that they're listed by tools and time required would allow for more effiency.
(27.40 KB 500x294 Revolver Pistol stalin 3.jpg)
(46.43 KB 500x278 Revolver Pistol stalin 2.jpg)
(27.55 KB 500x238 Revolver Pistol stalin 1.jpg)
https://twitter.com/cannibality/status/1278264327015821313?s=20 >In 1944, American workers gave the leader of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin unusual dagger-a revolver. <The inscription says "death to the fascist invaders" >there is an alternative history universe out there somewhere where Stalin killed Hitler with a gunblade Also see the Holy Sword of Stalingrad. http://www.russianswords.com/Stalin-english.htm
>>10511 The costumes come from here but they cost like 70 bucks. https://glowyzoey.com/collections/featured-products/products/adult-led-stickman-costume They're just made of LED strips, which are pretty expensive for something you're going to be shooting at. You could probably get the same effect for less money with some regular bulbs and creativity. Maybe actually get a reusable target.
(127.62 KB 1332x850 TKB-517.jpg)
I've been trying to find schematics/blueprints/whatever of a TKB-517 (ТКБ-517) both on English and Russian internet, I even adventured a little on the Russian internet and the only page I found on it was 404'd and not archived. Is there anywhere on the internet that would have these? It's supposedly a better and cheaper AKM that wasn't produced simply because AKMs were already rolling out the factories by the time the design was perfected.
(593.06 KB 2004x840 AK prototypes.png)
>>11149 Also have a collage of AK prototypes I made
>>11085 Holy hell it's got a kriss blade too. Bumiputera Stalin confirmed.
>>11149 Looks like an AKM mated with a PPS-43
>>11166 Yeah there's a few different types of furnishings, I don't know if that pic is an old one out of storage or if Kalashnikov Concern made it from old documents just to show off. Video of their gun: https://en.kalashnikov.media/video/weapons/panoptikum-tkb-517-germana-korobova Quick rundown: >German A. Korobov, Russian gun designer from Tula, began the development of assault rifles soon after the World War Two,when he designed the TKB-408 bullpup rifle for 1946-47Soviet Army trials. Despite the failure of TKB-408, Korobov continued the development of various assault rifles, both in bullpup and traditional configurations. During late 1940s, he tried gas delayed blowback action in his series of TKB-454 experimental assault rifles, all chambered for standard issue 7.62×39 ammunition. While these rifles displayed some good results in accuracy department, these also showed insufficient reliability. By the 1952, Korobov switched to the Kiraly-type retarded blowback action, with the two-part bolt that uses braking action of the lever, interposed between boltparts and receiver. This action allowed for significant increase of accuracy, as well as simplification of design and production, compared to then-standard KalashnikovAK assault rifles. >During mid-1950s, Soviet Army initiates newtrials for improved assault rifle design in the same 7.62×39 M43 caliber.Korobov submits his improved TKB-517 rifle, still based on the Kiraly typedelayed blowback action; this weapon was extensively tested against modified KalashnikovAK rifle, as well a number of other designs, and found to be superior toall. Korobov was found to be most accurate and controllable in full automaticmode (primary mode of fire, according to Soviet tactical doctrine), especiallywhen fired from the shoulder or from the hip. It was also significantly lighterand less expensive to make than modified AK. Nevertheless, Soviet Army preferred less effective, but familiar and already well established Kalashnikov AKM over the moreeffective and lighter, but entirely new design. >TKB-517 is delayed(retarded) blowback operated weapon, that uses two-part bolt system, designed prior to WW2 by Paul Kiraly of Hungary. In this system, bolt has two parts -lighter breech block with breechface and extractor, and heavier bolt carrier. A two-arm lever is interposed between these two parts; lower arm of the lever rests against the receiver when bolt is fully closed. When gun is fired, pressure in the chamber forces the cartridge case backwards and against the breech face.Bolt begins to travel back, but the lever acts as a mechanical disadvantage,transferring the short movement of the light bolt to the longer movement of the heavy bolt carrier. This action is sufficient to slow down initial movement of the breech face before the bullet leaves the barrel. Once the pressure in the barrel is low enough, the lever breaks the contact with the receiver, and therest of recoil cycle both bolt parts complete as a single unit. Similar system later has been used in the French FAMAS assault rifle.receiver of TKB-517 has been made from stamped steel, furniture was made from wood. Charging handle was attached to the bolt carrier at the right side. Safety/ fire mode selector was located above the pistol grip, also at the right side of the gun. TKB-517 used standard AK/AKM type magazines, including large-capacity 40 and 75-round ones, developed for RPK light machine gun. It uses the same system as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWQFtRId85U But I actually found out about the 517 from this gun lol, I'm mostly just curious about what's different between the two. It could be exactly the same for all I know because it was developed after the Soviets captured a bunch in Hungary.
(31.02 KB 619x190 TKB 517.jpg)
>>11169 Pic didn't load
>>9849 fuck off pol
>>11173 >responding to a two week old post to whine about "nigger" kys

Delete
Report

no cookies?