Posted on 01/29/2021 6:16:46 AM PST by Onthebrink
There are numerous debates that will likely never be resolved – Coke vs. Pepsi, rock vs. country – but when it comes to firearms, the debate goes deeper than mere opinion, especially when it is the AK-47 vs. M16. Both were developed during the Cold War, and while Soviet soldiers and Americans never actually met (fortunately) on the battlefield, the weapons have been used against one another in countless other conflicts.
Unlike ongoing debates over whether a Glock is better than a SIG Sauer or if 9mm is superior to .45 APC, the assault weapon debate is one where soldiers have ample experience.
(Excerpt) Read more at 19fortyfive.com ...
Another Dead Horse Being Beaten Alert!
AK47 by far.
Try to bang out replacement part for a M16 With an old tin can and some rocks. There are videos of people doing just that.
They are so reliable and hearty you can have an entire army of children in Sierra Leone. So easy to use and maintain even a child can use it with little training.
Assuming the same skill level of the shooter, which one is most likely to hit its target consistently?
That won't work against cultures that don't give a $hit about wounded troops.
Nasty scar I bet,
If he kept the
Arm at all!
I know people who have lost limbs, and it’s a terrible thing to happen. In the case of an Antifa terrorist though, the damage makes me smile.
It was the design concept when it was developed. AS you rightly point out, such concerns are a western morality. Communists and Islam have no ethos as lives are cheap to them
I have a few 5.56/.223 and they're ok, and the 7.62/.308 is the machine of choice. I have Ak's as well and I really like them. It's an excellent weapon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.