Living Legend

[One Eyed Cat]

Mikhail Kalashnikov, 85 year old inventor of the AK-47 - 100, christens a new liquid weapon. Na Zdrovya Mikhail Timofeevich! (Toast to his Health)




AK Links

[Morning Glory]

I suppose we should then salute Himmler for his work at Auschwitz?

psh.What a waste of a "good" mind.

[One Eyed Cat]

haha. It was meant tongue in cheek. I don't think that is a fair comparison, however.


OEC

[Morning Glory]

well they both masterminded something thats sole purpose was to kill people. I don't see much of a difference.

[One Eyed Cat]

So would any gunmaker be the equivalent of Himmler?

I'm stone opposed to Nazism and Communism, personally. I see no compelling reason to hate Kalashnikov, however. Himmler deliberately targetted people in a way Kalashnikov never even had the power to. He was just a gunmaker.


OEC

[Cerberus]

One could make the argument that an abundance of Kalashnikov's could have helped protect people from being rounded up and put in camps, so maybe they are quite the opposite.

[One Eyed Cat]

One could make the argument that an abundance of Kalashnikov's could have helped protect people from being rounded up and put in camps, so maybe they are quite the opposite.

That's a good point. I hadn't even expected a serious discussion on Kalashnikov, but there is no question AKs even ended up saving people from the Soviets themselves. At the time he first made them, they were obviously being used in defense.



OEC

[Morning Glory]

well I don't see a compelling reason to hate anyone. I don't really know the intentions of the very first gunmakers, but i'm pretty sure they had the idea of war in mind as one of thier objectives. I really don't see any reason to praise people for killing each other. people often argue that guns are neccesary for defense. but thier morality doesn't hold up to logic. If it's wrong for someone to kill you, how is it right for you to kill them? that's like saying I am against stealing, but if someone wanted to steal from me, it'd be OK if I stole from them. It's just self preservation that isn't wrong in itself, but projects a very negative outlook and faslely judges the greater populace. If you think that everyone is against you and wanting to murder you, then it's not far from taking it one more step on the offensive.

[One Eyed Cat]

I don't think killing people in self-defense is necessarily wrong. If you mean in the sense of someone walking around with a gun and acting all paranoid, I'd agree with you. When your country is invaded, however, I think you better be able to defend yourselves. My family were from Ukraine and saw first hand what happens to people who don't.


OEC

[Morning Glory]

yeah, but I do think that it would be alot easier for us to defend ourselves, and a lot harder for people that wished war to kill us if there were no guns.

[Morning Glory]

but that is a topic for another discussion. I think it's called how do you feel about gun bans? or something. people on here really like talking about guns and drugs, i've noticed. those seem to be the hottest issues. haha

[Tequila Zaire]

Love the man...LOVE his work...genius of arms and to dream up such a well loved, infamous, and reliable weapon is something to be proud of. His weapon is like the M-16...they symbolize a nation...for good or ill.

[Amelia G]

Love the man...LOVE his work...genius of arms and to dream up such a well loved, infamous, and reliable weapon is something to be proud of. His weapon is like the M-16...they symbolize a nation...for good or ill.

Very eloquently expressed, TZ

Thanks for the newsbite OEC

[Tequila Zaire]

I suppose we should then salute Himmler for his work at Auschwitz?

psh.What a waste of a "good" mind.

Not even in the same ballpark...Himmler's legacy is the SS...Mikhail's is a weapon system...a rifle. Very diffrent...a rifles life is one at the mercy of it's users...the SS's life was simply to destroy life by their chosing...using more than just german rifles.

This is not even in the same ballpark...it's like blaming mother nature for the natural events of the earth that kill people or the inventor of the car for car crashes. A rifle is designed for both defense and offense...can't automaticly blame the creator...that's short sighted nonsense.

[Tequila Zaire]

Very eloquently expressed, TZ

Thanks for the newsbite OEC

Thank you.

Their are a couple of excellent documentaries on the man too. One is currently screening on IFC (or Sundance?) this month...another pops up from time to time on the History Channel's Tales of the Gun.

[One Eyed Cat]

Love the man...LOVE his work...genius of arms and to dream up such a well loved, infamous, and reliable weapon is something to be proud of. His weapon is like the M-16...they symbolize a nation...for good or ill.

Well said. That was pretty much the intent of the post. Plus I just think it's neat the guy is still alive. He's actually a member of the Russian Parliament in an anti-communist party.
He's a complex, brilliant and notorious man.


OEC

[CPRB]

I dunno what went wrong it was a joke? he's got a martini and a good martini is like a good AK47....anyhow I giggled and TZ does make some good points once in a while

[Morning Glory]

This is not even in the same ballpark...it's like blaming mother nature for the natural events of the earth that kill people or the inventor of the car for car crashes. A rifle is designed for both defense and offense...can't automaticly blame the creator...that's short sighted nonsense.

I don't really know what you are trying to say here. that natural events are not caused by nature? or that they aren't caused by some matriarchal diety? the former would be beyond even a childs logic, the later being true. which I never would refute. I think I've clearly demonstrated on here that I don't believe in the supernatural.

as to your remark about how you cannot blame the inventer of the car for car crashes, that has to be the most ludicrous thing i've heard all day. Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot, who is considered to be the inventor of the first automobile is also known for the frist person to crash one in 1770. It was because of this that the french government decided that his automobile was too dangerous and costly. After this, further attempts at car production were largely unsuccessful until over a hundred years later when the combustion engine was invented.

[killerkat]

why are you the one always starting arguments , im not sure weather to admire that or not ,man................i'm thinkin' ...not

[Morning Glory]

to resort to your leval of thinking for a moment, No I do not hold the person who figured out that pottasium nitrate and sulfer creates an explosive reaction responsilbe for the millions of people that have died from guns. I do hold the person(s) who created assault weapons that fire over 100 rounds a minute (which has no practical purpose in sport hunting, unless your'e of the same rationale that dropping dynamite into the water is "fishing", and is gross overkill for personal defense.) responsible for all the people that have been killed with these weapons.

[Morning Glory]

look, this is just ridiculous, all arguments on whether people should own guns or not, is not the subject of this discussion. my point was that the invention of the ak-47 is not a warrant for praise. I base the rationale of this point on the facts that have been presented here. you say that you admire this guy for making a superior, reliable, technologically advanced weapon to defend his people against other's who were using cruder, inferior machine guns. and in that aim he succeeded.... but then there was a need to develop a gun that was better than the ak-47 to counter against the people who would now attack using this weapon. It just goes on and on. and all this leads to is the proliferation of weapons that are capable of a greater devistating leval, and which are neccesary now to protect us from the very same weapons that we are using for protection.

[killerkat]

i all honesty, (now god forbid morning glory that this is my point of view),but soo fukin what .yea he made a bad ass gun yea it could kill me too,but right now it doesn't affect me.i never understood why people get all in a bad mood being a bitch,by bitching and yelling about shit that yea maby killed million but it's too fuckin late now ,so what,why not put all that wonderfull knowledge you seem to act (and probbally do have)to the use of something good,instead of always starting arguments on shit that doesn't nessicarily affect you.

now since im sure your going to say some shit like"I'll stoop down to your level" or some other smart ass comment go to h*** ,man

[killerkat]

look, this is just ridiculous, all arguments on whether people should own guns or not, is not the subject of this discussion. my point was that the invention of the ak-47 is not a warrant for praise. I base the rationale of this point on the facts that have been presented here. you say that you admire this guy for making a superior, reliable, technologically advanced weapon to defend his people against other's who were using cruder, inferior machine guns. and in that aim he succeeded.... but then there was a need to develop a gun that was better than the ak-47 to counter against the people who would now attack using this weapon. It just goes on and on. and all this leads to is the proliferation of weapons that are capable of a greater devistating leval, and which are neccesary now to protect us from the very same weapons that we are using for protection.

and by the way i repect you greatly becuze of your knowledge and that was put very well ,with a good point ,but once again in all honesty i don't think this thread or others,that you've done this to, was ment to bring on some deep discussion about the worlds weapons issues or anyother type of thread you've carried of to some crazy deep dicusssion and ,(maby jus to me),but sound like an ass .

[LrdSatanas]

Im toasting him now. I plan on buying one of his rifiles in a couple of months before they bann them again. (i could get one before the ban but a used one now i can get a brand new one! better hurry before the election)

[Morning Glory]

ok. as you wish. here's you're smart ass comment: as above stated, I don't believe in your hell. also as I recall, there's like a bajillion things that make you go there, so you should perhaps be worried as well.

In all honesty as well, I do respect your point of view. The point of this place is so that the members can discuss ideas and share thier points of view. That is why I "start arguements" in which I use deductive reasoning and facts to support my oppinions. I have nothing against any of the people here. with the exception of a few bitter flame monsters, I like you all well. Even tequila whom I frequently clash with. He puts the effort into adequetly explaining his positions and as such I do take them seriously, but I base them on the merit of each post, I wouldn't do things like saying "well I didn't like what you said in 'the gun thread' so you're stupid and we can't take you seriously, how can you say that people should own puppies in the 'should people own puppies thread'?"

[killerkat]

ok. as you wish. here's you're smart ass comment: as above stated, I don't believe in your hell. also as I recall, there's like a bajillion things that make you go there, so you should perhaps be worried as well.

In all honesty as well, I do respect your point of view. The point of this place is so that the members can discuss ideas and share thier points of view. That is why I "start arguements" in which I use deductive reasoning and facts to support my oppinions. I have nothing against any of the people here. with the exception of a few bitter flame monsters, I like you all well. Even tequila whom I frequently clash with. He puts the effort into adequetly explaining his positions and as such I do take them seriously, but I base them on the merit of each post, I wouldn't do things like saying "well I didn't like what you said in 'the gun thread' so you're stupid and we can't take you seriously, how can you say that people should own puppies in the 'should people own puppies thread'?"

hmmmmm.......well put ,but that doesn't Necessarily answer my questin(sorry to get off subject),but why do start these"arguments"

and by the way ,the go to hell was just a fiqure of speech ,i too don't believe in hell

[Morning Glory]

hahaha. um, really just for something to talk about. I honestly don't care that much about guns, I do think it's a raw deal that so many people are killing and hurting each other. that's not cool. but it doesn't really effect me. Like I said i'm not trying to take away your guns, most of the people here don't seem like the type to form invading armies (at least until we give them the chance.) but um.. yeah...if you all wanted to agree with me, and not argue about stuff I guess that'd be cool too.

[killerkat]

hahaha. um, really just for something to talk about. I honestly don't care that much about guns, I do think it's a raw deal that so many people are killing and hurting each other. that's not cool. but it doesn't really effect me. Like I said i'm not trying to take away your guns, most of the people here don't seem like the type to form invading armies (at least until we give them the chance.) but um.. yeah...if you all wanted to agree with me, and not argue about stuff I guess that'd be cool too.

hmm.....hahaa Quote"but um.. yeah...if you all wanted to agree with me, and not argue about stuff I guess that'd be cool too."

i guess i'll have to try that for now on ,i guess thats a good reason,nothing like a good agument avery now and then as long as it doesn't get all fuckyou ,no fuck you ,kind a thing,just noticed you do this kind a thing alot and i kinda bugged me, but if just for the reason you stated as is well and cool...i guess...hahha

[Nightingale]

I enjoyed playing with the AK47. It uses 7.62mm ammunition and can take the 7.62 rounds from other weapons without any problems. The Brits SLR also used 7.62 but was incapable of handling 7.62 designed for the AK47 or other weapons. Adaptability is good. Didn't help them in the long run, though, since it is humans who get and use the weapons, and they are not quite so reliable.

[Morning Glory]

naw, You don't have to agree with me. I just tend to follow a radical viewpoint, I guess and try to get those thoughts out in the hopes of at least maybe getting some people to think about a side of an issue that they aren't used to hearing about, and almost probibly wouldn't hear about in any other medium besides a place like this.

[Tequila Zaire]

I don't really know what you are trying to say here. that natural events are not caused by nature? or that they aren't caused by some matriarchal diety? the former would be beyond even a childs logic, the later being true. which I never would refute. I think I've clearly demonstrated on here that I don't believe in the supernatural.

as to your remark about how you cannot blame the inventer of the car for car crashes, that has to be the most ludicrous thing i've heard all day. Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot, who is considered to be the inventor of the first automobile is also known for the frist person to crash one in 1770. It was because of this that the french government decided that his automobile was too dangerous and costly. After this, further attempts at car production were largely unsuccessful until over a hundred years later when the combustion engine was invented.

I'll make it simple. You can't blame inventors for their inventions...you do that, you choke to death advancement, growth, and progress. Weapons need to develop just as much anything both to protect a state and strengthen a military.

As far as your comment about the first car crash...simple example of short sighted thinking...ole Henry Ford didn't let that stop him from setting up the institution to pump em out...and in time people developed SAFER cars...and faster ones at the same time.

[Tequila Zaire]

look, this is just ridiculous, all arguments on whether people should own guns or not, is not the subject of this discussion. my point was that the invention of the ak-47 is not a warrant for praise. I base the rationale of this point on the facts that have been presented here. you say that you admire this guy for making a superior, reliable, technologically advanced weapon to defend his people against other's who were using cruder, inferior machine guns. and in that aim he succeeded.... but then there was a need to develop a gun that was better than the ak-47 to counter against the people who would now attack using this weapon. It just goes on and on. and all this leads to is the proliferation of weapons that are capable of a greater devistating leval, and which are neccesary now to protect us from the very same weapons that we are using for protection.

You're leaving out the advancement of technologies that PROTECT from such weapons systems like Kevlar body armor...simple evolution that is not evil or wrong...it's all rather natural. Like the man with the stick...then the sharp stick...then the sharp stone on the end of the stick...then the Super Stick 9000a...things grow with the tech of the times.

Can't deny human nature in this way. We're simply not wired to live in harmony on a grand level...their is always someone who will either exploit and abuse or conspire and threaten...better to have an AK than a twig...or even the Super Stick 9000a.