Coolest/Ugliest Weapons V5 - Bullpup AKs are the best - General

[img]http://www.chuckhawks.com/ruger_super_redhawk.jpg[/img] Just look at it, it's revolver perfection. [img]http://donshobbyguns.com/images/stories/virtuemart/product/dsc_01615.jpg[/img] It even comes in chode, if you're into that sort of thing. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/Ruger_Super_Redhawk_Alaskan_2.JPG[/img]

A friend of mine assembles the Ruger GP100 and Super Redhawk in the New Hampshire Ruger factory. [t]http://coonaninc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/1518648_693283904044564_133444581_o.jpg[/t] .357 Coonan Some other misc. things: [t]http://www.realguns.com/images/460rwlndkimasbld.jpg[/t] .460 Rowland [t]http://www.mexicoarmado.com/attachments/semi-automaticas/62822d1220665458-conversion-glock-calibre-50-tambien-para-1911-10bl_9_600.jpg[/t] .50 GI [t]http://www.tanfoglio.it/uploads/catalog/images/piccola3jpg1.jpg[/t] Tanfoglio Thor Raptor: a pistol that fires .223, .308, and/or .45-70 in a longer barrel. Supposedly the 1911 frame was adapted so the mag catch opens the barrel and the hammer can be accessed. Looks like some sort of James Bond gadget.

[QUOTE=download;46659578]Western doctrine, particularly when working on your home turf isn't to fire massive amounts of ammunition and heavy ordnance in a civilian area where you could possibly kill civilians. It's radically different to how western militaries operate. On top of that there is the potential of hostages (again, the risk is massively increased in a civilian area). Western militaries when working at home would never risk the lives of possible hostages like that.[/QUOTE] They knew that there are no hostages in the buildings this time though. But yeah it's very different. I guess because [b]DEM AKs man[/b]. The whole fight is just a good pretext to get hold of these lovely [b]AyyyKeeeeyys[/b] and put these hot lovely babes to use. Both sides are there just to fire dem aykeys. This is the difference. You don't have aykeys in military use because with aykeys soldiers are too tempted to shoot something to simply witness the magnificient AK in use. The pleasure of firing AK is enough to make you fall in love with your AK. Because it's your AK. The AK chose you as it's master. Cleaning the AK is way more pleasure then making love to your wife. AK is happiness. God bless kalashnikov.

[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46660061]They knew that there are no hostages in the buildings this time though. [Retarded 'anything critical of Russia must be a troll' shit] [/QUOTE] I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because you're being a fucking retard. Unless they cleared the building they don't know there aren't any hostages in there. They can't just look at a fucking building with their xray vision and know. IF the British did this shit in Northern Ireland like riddling a whole fucking building with bullets or liberally using grenades because of a single sniper there would be hell to pay.

[QUOTE=download;46660096]I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because you're being a fucking retard. Unless they cleared the building they don't know there aren't any hostages in there. They can't just look at a fucking building with their xray vision and know. IF the British did this shit in Northern Ireland like riddling a whole fucking building with bullets or liberally using grenades because of a single sniper there would be hell to pay.[/QUOTE] The Russians have a different idea of hostages than the West [t]http://i.imgur.com/XUW9lru.png[/t] [sp]This is a joke, don't take it too seriously[/sp]

[QUOTE=download;46660096]I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because you're being a fucking retard. Unless they cleared the building they don't know there aren't any hostages in there. They can't just look at a fucking building with their xray vision and know. IF the British did this shit in Northern Ireland like riddling a whole fucking building with bullets or liberally using grenades because of a single sniper there would be hell to pay.[/QUOTE] So you didn't watch the video because there is at least one sniper rifle in the video, and didn't read anything about the fight too. Good job calling me a retard for a joke post (joke you didn't get even though I did all I could to make it stand out as a joke). Either way its true that chechen soldiers are mostly the guys that used the fight against the Russians in gorilla warfare. They probably adopted the russian techniques russians used to clear the buildings during the chechen wars. However the difference is that during the chechen wars there were no possible civillians around, it was a full scale war and raining fire around was justified. I agree it's not justified now. But I don't know the situation. The RPG looks silly and unncececary to me too. But maybe they had a reason to do it, I wouldn't call them stupid right away with no info.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46660116]The Russians have a different idea of hostages than the West [t]http://i.imgur.com/XUW9lru.png[/t] [sp]This is a joke, don't take it too seriously[/sp][/QUOTE] "It’s sometimes incumbent on a nation-state to send the message that, as Lady Thatcher is rumored to have once said, “That is something up with which we will not put.” That’s one reason why the inept Russian Spetsnaz theater rescue attempt that left most of the hostages as dead as the Chechen terrorist hostage-takers was not entirely a failure: the Chechen leaders made the best propaganda of it that they could, but they didn’t crawl back in their caves thinking Ivan is a push-over. Sixth Rule: The Hostages are a Bonus This sanguinary idea came from the Israelis, originally, and reached us, in the early days of national CT planning, via our British cousins: the second most important thing is to rescue the hostages. The most important thing is to kill all the hostage takers. In this, hostage-takers are different from enemy soldiers and different from ordinary criminals. Unlike soldiers, they are not protected by international conventions, and because they train and operate in a cellular organization, and are considered expendable by their leaders, they are unlikely to possess worthwhile actionable intelligence. Unlike criminals, they are likely to be disruptive and recruit more terrorists in prison, and their at-large confederates are highly likely to commit more atrocities in an attempt to secure them release."

[QUOTE=M.Ciaster;46656973]'.22 ricocheting around in someone's skull' is a dumb myth, it's literally not a thing that can happen - brain matter is way too good at stopping the bullet, and the skull's either gonna shatter or just stop the bullet outright (yeah this was probably a sarcastic joke post but then again you're from the land of 'we found a few .22 bullets in our garden, better move or they'll explode and kill everyone' if flagdog is to be believed :v:) tiny calibers do do some [i]weird[/i] shit inside the body - nothing like having a .25 only chip your skull a bit and then have these chips give you an aneurysm the next day! (might not have been exactly how it happened but I definitely remember reading about it)[/QUOTE] just gonna leave this here [quote]My Masters is is in forensic ballistics. My thesis was on cranial ballistic wounding (head shots) (okay, I have a sick sense of "coolness") It is absolutely amazing how many times a .22LR can/will riccochet inside a body and where it can end up. On one occassion, I participated in a post mortem of a subject who had been shot 5 times in the back of the head by a 22LR revolver. All 5 shots were at contact range so there was considerable gas expansion damage within the cranial cavity. Only three of the 22LR slugs were recovered within the cranium and there were no exit wounds. A C-T scan revealed a single lead slug in the throat and the last confined in the bladder. Both had careened around insie the head/trunk of the body before running out of velocity and lodging in tissue. In the US, more people die from 22LR gun shot wounds then from any other caliber. A 22LR gun shot wound (gsw) is almost always a surgeon's nightmare. Most especially when it is a torso hit. Once penetration is made, the reduced velocity of the 22LR round causes a riccochet from bone mass unless there is zero deflection. (straight on hit ) Because the torso has so many bones and the odds of the gsw being from an angle then the final impact resting place can be anywhere. There have been instances where a direct shot to the sternum (chest bone connecting the ribs over the heart)deflected upwards into the lower face and mandible after the initial impact.[/quote] Also you're thinking of an embolism, not an aneurysm. [editline]7th December 2014[/editline] source for quote: [url]http://wethearmed.com/general-firearms-discussion/%27bouncing-bullets%27-inside-the-body/[/url]

[QUOTE=Tinter;46655937]Probably not. Zombies are usually less fragile than people, and .22lr is weak. WEAK![/QUOTE] I don't see why this is so dumb, maybe other than what I said about 22. Depending on what kind of zombies you're talking, the typical zombie is tougher than people. Media depicting zombies tend to be very "Destroy the head".

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/9exLhe2.jpg[/IMG] I like this thing. It's adorable.

[QUOTE=Tinter;46661089]I don't see why this is so dumb, maybe other than what I said about 22. Depending on what kind of zombies you're talking, the typical zombie is tougher than people. Media depicting zombies tend to be very "Destroy the head".[/QUOTE] zombies don't real, how can we say we know whether they're weak or stronk?

[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;46660381]just gonna leave this here Also you're thinking of an embolism, not an aneurysm. [editline]7th December 2014[/editline] source for quote: [url]http://wethearmed.com/general-firearms-discussion/%27bouncing-bullets%27-inside-the-body/[/url][/QUOTE] yeah, I was referring to the oddly prevalent '.22 will bounce around your skull and turn your brain to mush' myth, not saying that bullets can't ricochet inside the body at all. and yeah, probably - I'm not too versed in medical terminology :v:

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46660116]The Russians have a different idea of hostages than the West [t]http://i.imgur.com/XUW9lru.png[/t] [sp]This is a joke, don't take it too seriously[/sp][/QUOTE] as pointed out in longer posts, israel would probably bring in some micro-uzi-minigun and say something like "we got the bad guys, now lets see how many hostages are left" also note to self.... micro-uzi-minigun [editline]7th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=M.Ciaster;46661198]yeah, I was referring to the oddly prevalent '.22 will bounce around your skull and turn your brain to mush' myth, not saying that bullets can't ricochet inside the body at all. and yeah, probably - I'm not too versed in medical terminology :v:[/QUOTE] probably spawned from the wikipedia article on penetrating head injury as quoted from wikipedia [quote]However, [B]low-velocity penetrating objects such as slow bullets may ricochet inside the skull[/B], continuing to cause damage until they stop moving.[3][/quote] i always heard something like old muzzle loaders being large caliber and low power bounced around in people's bodies if they hit a big enough bone

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ldo7Yjw.jpg[/IMG] meanwhile in ukraine top tier protection

if a stupid idea works it's not a stupid idea

[QUOTE=Turing;46662544][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ldo7Yjw.jpg[/IMG] meanwhile in ukraine top tier protection[/QUOTE] well lada nivas are already fucking bulletproof as is sooo

Doesn't actually seem like all that stupid an idea when you think about it, the vest is already designed to protect against shrapnel and smallarms fire, and with it placed like that it's effectively being doubled up since any projectile that strikes the door will have to go through the vest twice before hitting someone inside. Doesn't cover very much area but it should cover what it can pretty well, as far as improvised armor goes you can do a lot worse with a lot more.

[QUOTE=M.Ciaster;46662739]well lada nivas are already fucking bulletproof as is sooo[/QUOTE] in the words of the mighty clarkson "made with remarkably thick steel" [video=youtube;hX9-7ZTThvM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX9-7ZTThvM[/video]

[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/M4_Sherman.JPG/800px-M4_Sherman.JPG[/IMG] M4A1 Sherman, here shown during D-day landings on 6th of June 1944 Why? No real reason. I just watched Fury, though. It's a movie about four people who are dicks who have a tank. Then a fifth person who isn't a dick sits in their tank. They're dicks to him, but then the leader-dick-person shaves his beard and stops being a dick. Then people start dying.

^ then the not-dick [sp] becomes an amazingly psychotic killing machine[/sp]

[QUOTE=Sableye;46663349]in the words of the mighty clarkson "made with remarkably thick steel" [video=youtube;hX9-7ZTThvM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX9-7ZTThvM[/video][/QUOTE] Glorious Soviet steel.

speaking of that movie [t]http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Brad-Pitt-Gets-Down-and-Dirty-in-New-Fury-Trailer-458234-2.jpg[/t] can anyone identify what gun brad pit uses in that movie? i thought it was an stg 44 but i wasn't really sure

It's an STG-44.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46663371]^ then the not-dick [sp] becomes an amazingly psychotic killing machine[/sp][/QUOTE] Given how retarded everyone is acting in that movie, it's no real surprise. I'm a killing machine too, against AI set to easy on CS:GO.

[QUOTE=Riller;46663410]Given how retarded everyone is acting in that movie, it's no real surprise. I'm a killing machine too, against AI set to easy on CS:GO.[/QUOTE] i was plesently supprised they found a role for shia the lebeuff where he wasn't upstaging anyone and actually didn't make you want to kill him for the nazis, the rest was pretty dumb, but it could have been a ton worse

[QUOTE=Sableye;46663394]speaking of that movie [t]http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Brad-Pitt-Gets-Down-and-Dirty-in-New-Fury-Trailer-458234-2.jpg[/t] can anyone identify what gun brad pit uses in that movie? i thought it was an stg 44 but i wasn't really sure[/QUOTE] That's a STG-44. STG-45's look like this: [t]http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/ak/stg/stg45_h900w.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46663510]That's a STG-44. STG-45's look like this: [t]http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/ak/stg/stg45_h900w.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] How'd they make it look ugly?

[QUOTE=Binladen34;46663958]How'd they make it look ugly?[/QUOTE] They spared absolutely every expense.

[QUOTE=Binladen34;46663958]How'd they make it look ugly?[/QUOTE] i think they moved to more stamped production, also 1945 vs 1944, like german engineering went from precision machining to...whatever they can make from spare cans

Forgotten Weapons a pretty good video on the development cycle behind it: [video=youtube;WEPwmYcCPFs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEPwmYcCPFs[/video] Although unfortunately the audio is a bit buggered up. Also, to clear up any potential confusion: StG-45(M) [SturmGewehr 1945 Mauser] was the designation for the Gerat 06H, so the names are used interchangeably.