Kalashnikov suffered 'unbearable' feelings of responsibility for the many people killed with his rif - Polidicks

This reminds me of in Metro 2033, when in one of the stations bars, you overhear a conversation between two metro residents about Kalashnikov. One of them was saying to imagine that your invention is historically responsible for so many deaths, and he wondered how Kalashnikov had felt about it.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43537132]And how many Gatling guns do you see in wars today? Checkmate.[/QUOTE] Pretty much all jets have them Door guns on helicopters are Gatling guns Some attack helicopter cannons are Gatling guns

[QUOTE=TheMrFailz;43537550]Oh look a (Modern variation of a) Gatling gun! [/QUOTE] I'm not a gun expert but rotary cannons are not specifically Gatling guns. Gatling guns are hand operated. Would you say that rifles are muskets?

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43538511]I'm not a gun expert but rotary cannons are not specifically Gatling guns. Gatling guns are hand operated. Would you say that rifles are muskets?[/QUOTE] Rotary Guns were usually operated with the power of slipstreams going into a fan that was outside the plane or gun pod. It's a similar'ish theory to how cranks work on Gatling Guns, just put on loadsa steroids. Also: [t]http://imgur.com/HBpYBW4[/t] One of the images running around the gun community in regards to Kalashnikovs feelings about how many innocents were killed with his gun.

[QUOTE=Sableye;43534990]ikr, theres this one that is like 8 inches long and has a nice curve to it[/QUOTE] wait are we talking about dicks here [editline]14th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43539034]Rotary Guns were usually operated with the power of slipstreams going into a fan that was outside the plane or gun pod. It's a similar'ish theory to how cranks work on Gatling Guns, just put on loadsa steroids. Also: [t]http://imgur.com/HBpYBW4[/t] One of the images running around the gun community in regards to Kalashnikovs feelings about how many innocents were killed with his gun.[/QUOTE] at this point the only way to possibly honor his memory is to completely wipe the ak off the face of the earth, to be honest. it was used to protect his country. it succeeded in its purpose. now the ak is the tool of choice for terrorists and murderers. it's the tool of choice for civil wars. it doesn't save more lives than it ends, and from this point forward, it won't. to believe otherwise is ridiculous and simply protecting oneself from reality.

[QUOTE=BFG9000;43536996]Why are people calling it a weapon of mass destruction? It's not like it's a nuke or chemical weapon[/QUOTE] Iraq had them. Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. QED

[QUOTE=darunner;43536524][video=youtube;O2uVS0XXAyE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2uVS0XXAyE[/video][/QUOTE] Why did he make such a serious pumpkin? :-|

Why not? [editline]14th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=BrickInHead;43539170] at this point the only way to possibly honor his memory is to completely wipe the ak off the face of the earth, to be honest. it was used to protect his country. it succeeded in its purpose. now the ak is the tool of choice for terrorists and murderers. it's the tool of choice for civil wars. it doesn't save more lives than it ends, and from this point forward, it won't. to believe otherwise is ridiculous and simply protecting oneself from reality.[/QUOTE] That's stupid, then another weapon would become the 'tool of choice' and it would be a waste of engineering

[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;43533589]I don't see people [b]shooting sculptures out of stone with AK's though.[/b] I mean I don't doubt it exists, I've never seen or heard of it, and the first thing I think of with dynamite is actually Mount Rushmore.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=darunner;43536524][video=youtube;O2uVS0XXAyE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2uVS0XXAyE[/video][/QUOTE] :| This is not out of stone. Other than that, shooting pumpkins is always fun.

The world we live in.

[QUOTE=e.;43540568]The world we live in.[/QUOTE] Same one we've always lived in, just fancier gadgets. People are always going to be people.

[QUOTE=Binladen34;43533519]It's pretty terrible that not many people recognized that this man was just trying to build a tool to defend his homeland from the nazis, [B]and accidentally created a weapon of unsurmountable destruction.[/B][/QUOTE] Posts like this always irk me The AK47 fills a unique role in the sense that it puts an affordable and reliable weapon in the hands of poor people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a modern means to defend or assert themselves. When sitting in a wealthy, democratic 1st world country with an organised police force and army, you may see the ak47 as a tool of destruction from your biased perspective, whereas a tribal militiaman in a third world country might rightfully see the ak47 as being his means of survival in a hostile existence. It'd be lovely if people could just get along and be fair to one another, but in lieu of the fact that people don't get along, it's nice to see the AK47 providing defense and power to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a reliable modern weapon.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;43541370]Posts like this always irk me The AK47 fills a unique role in the sense that it puts an affordable and reliable weapon in the hands of poor people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a modern means to defend or assert themselves. When sitting in a wealthy, democratic 1st world country with an organised police force and army, you may see the ak47 as a tool of destruction from your biased perspective, whereas a tribal militiaman in a third world country might rightfully see the ak47 as being his means of survival in a hostile existence. It'd be lovely if people could just get along and be fair to one another, but in lieu of the fact that people don't get along, it's nice to see the AK47 providing defense and power to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a reliable modern weapon.[/QUOTE] Unknown Soldier #21 by Rick Veitch is the first thing that comes to mind thinking about this post. Comic about an AK-47 switching hands between several owners in Africa, with the narrative of the gun telling its story about how for every life it touches and takes, its just a gun. [t]http://graphicpolicy.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/unknown-soldier-21-026.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;43541370]Posts like this always irk me The AK47 fills a unique role in the sense that it puts an affordable and reliable weapon in the hands of poor people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a modern means to defend or assert themselves. When sitting in a wealthy, democratic 1st world country with an organised police force and army, you may see the ak47 as a tool of destruction from your biased perspective, whereas a tribal militiaman in a third world country might rightfully see the ak47 as being his means of survival in a hostile existence. It'd be lovely if people could just get along and be fair to one another, but in lieu of the fact that people don't get along, it's nice to see the AK47 providing defense and power to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a reliable modern weapon.[/QUOTE] Blame the Soviet politburo, not Kalashnikov. They're the one that sold the weapons, not him he manufactured them, the Soviets cashed in on it.

Man, I feel really sorry for him. I really wish he wasn't feeling these feelings of guilt, he really doesn't deserve it.

You could argue that the gun saved others too

[QUOTE=BFG9000;43539927]Why not? [editline]14th January 2014[/editline] That's stupid, then another weapon would become the 'tool of choice' and it would be a waste of engineering[/QUOTE] oh absolutely no doubt but to try to believe that the AK can become some ridiculous "tool of justice" is simply untrue. civil wars and rebellions and what they stand for generally tend to cause more innocent deaths than nonviolent channels of any form of regime change, soooooooo in the end, no matter what happens the dude's right, the weapon he designed is now causing more deaths than it prevents if you really want to absolve him in death of that and preserve his will, the only thing to do is to eliminate the ak which won't happen because it owns it's really good at punching holes in things!

[QUOTE=BFG9000;43536996]Why are people calling it a weapon of mass destruction? It's not like it's a nuke or chemical weapon[/QUOTE] well the AK certainly caused much more destruction than either of those!

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;43543019]oh absolutely no doubt but to try to believe that the AK can become some ridiculous "tool of justice" is simply untrue. civil wars and rebellions and what they stand for generally tend to cause more innocent deaths than nonviolent channels of any form of regime change, soooooooo[/QUOTE] Sometimes violence is really the only solution. In these situations its hard to see how things can improve.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43543087]Sometimes violence is really the only solution. In these situations its hard to see how things can improve.[/QUOTE] i agree to a certain extent but realistically speaking, it's the most destructive form of regime change. it just is. imagine if india had fought for its independence instead of using satyagraha. it would've been a fucking bloodbath and a genocide on top of that. i'd like to think that human beings are truly capable of moving past war. call me optimistic, i just think it is possible.

[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;43537648]No, but they [I]are [/I]made for violence. That's like saying that kitchen knives aren't made for cutting up squirrels and acting as though that negates the fact that they're still made to cut up stuff.[/QUOTE] But I thought[QUOTE=Kondor;43534266]kitchen knives aren't made for killing[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=BrickInHead;43543019]oh absolutely no doubt but to try to believe that the AK can become some ridiculous "tool of justice" is simply untrue. civil wars and rebellions and what they stand for generally tend to cause more innocent deaths than nonviolent channels of any form of regime change, soooooooo[/QUOTE] The AK-47 was designed in the aftermath of the Great Patriotic War, in which the Soviets suffered [I]ten million casualties[/I]. You cannot blame him for creating a weapon that the Red Army could use to prevent that from ever possibly happening again. Wanting to destroy them all would be, well, nigh impossible. Who's going to do that? Half the Assault Rifles [I]in the entire world[/I] are AK models or copies. Many are used by the people you just mentioned, and we're already trying to kill a few of those groups, it's going so well. Even the 'Legit' owner, Russia, has used the rifle on civilians multiple times, and they still use various AK models ranging from auxiliary troops with AKM's to front line infantry with AK-74M's.

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;43543115]i agree to a certain extent but realistically speaking, it's the most destructive form of regime change. it just is. imagine if india had fought for its independence instead of using satyagraha.[/QUOTE] India had reached a boiling point. The fear of millions of violent Indians scared away the British. It ended in a bloodbath anyways considering all of the wars and migrations that happened after the independence of the subcontinent was achieved.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43538511]I'm not a gun expert but rotary cannons are not specifically Gatling guns. Gatling guns are hand operated. Would you say that rifles are muskets?[/QUOTE] No, but muskets are rifles. And Gatling guns are a type of rotary gun. [editline]15th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=hypno-toad;43541370]Posts like this always irk me The AK47 fills a unique role in the sense that it puts an affordable and reliable weapon in the hands of poor people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a modern means to defend or assert themselves. When sitting in a wealthy, democratic 1st world country with an organised police force and army, you may see the ak47 as a tool of destruction from your biased perspective, whereas a tribal militiaman in a third world country might rightfully see the ak47 as being his means of survival in a hostile existence. It'd be lovely if people could just get along and be fair to one another, but in lieu of the fact that people don't get along, it's nice to see the AK47 providing defense and power to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford a reliable modern weapon.[/QUOTE] To play the devil's advocate, on the other hand, the AKM also provides a cheap way for every type of terrorist or insurgent or rebel, from religious extremists to radical ideological groups, to fight against whomever they deem their enemy. But to drive that point further, a gun is a gun and a weapon is a weapon. It's not a tool for destruction until its put in the hands of a person who wants destruction.

[QUOTE=STIGintheBRIG;43536599]Actually russian weapons during and pre WWII were very crude. Like everything else the Russians did during that time, the only reason they were effective was because they churned out insane amounts of them. If anything the Stg44 can be considered the spiritual precursor to the AK line.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say they were crude, they were designed to be cheap and easy to use, but not crude. An exception is the SVT-40 were actually so complex that when they Red Army lost tens of thousands of them in Operation Barbarossa, they replaced many of them with simple Mosin–Nagants, because SVT's were more expensive and required more training. In fact, 'desperation' weapons like the British STEN, German MP 3008, or Polish Błyskawica were much more crude than what Russia was churning out.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43543243]No, but muskets are rifles. And Gatling guns are a type of rotary gun. [/QUOTE] nah, a rifle has rifling, muskets are smoothbore

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;43537132]And how many Gatling guns do you see in wars today? Checkmate.[/QUOTE] Guns that use the principal? Almost every aircraft currently used by any country, many ground vehicles, hell, there's even a man portable one, although its meant as a deployed weapon, not something you hold onto while firing, and it was never actually put into full production.

If Kalashnikov is to blame for all the deaths, then the inventor of the flashlight is to blame for the fleshlight. Edit: which in a way has killed WAY more "people" than the ak-47 if you think about it.

He did state he'd have rather been a lawn mower engineer, this guy deserves not only respect but a humbling notion for atleast even considering the responsibility, even if it wasn't his fault.