Looks more like an AR-15
Edit: After some pointers from other commentors I concede that I was wrong, and this is in fact an AK
@Downvote Trash, they have “tactical” AKs that are black like that
@bepis, I know, but based on the barrel shape it looks more like an AR-15. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's an AK.
@Downvote Trash, lol its a bad angle I can’t tell either and I own both. The curved mags are a good sign its an AK but they have those for ARs too
@Downvote Trash, AK-47
@Downvote Trash, it's got the banana mags
@Downvote Trash, No. Its an all-47. It says so right there...
@Downvote Trash, looks like it's either and AR-47 or an AK-15 to me.
@Downvote Trash, they have AR15 style AK’s. Basically an AR15 chambered in 7.62x39 that accepts “banana style” magazines.
@Downvote Trash, it's an ak, has the grip(not necessarily important), mag well, and gas block of an ak. Trust me, I'm a stranger on the internet
@Downvote Trash, it has the receiver of an AKM, not an AR-15, the magazines are for an AK, and the gas block is AK. Hard to tell at first, but it’s Soviet pattern.
@Downvote Trash, my guess is that by the magazine curvature it's an AR. AK mags are a lot more curved.
@ImNotRacistBut, The AR-10
@Guy Fawkes, depends on the system. Both use gas, AR’s typical use direct impingement, AK’s typically use piston driven systems. An AR10 can be chambered in 7.62 and be gas impingement or piston driven. Basically it’s all a fustercluck now
@Downvote Trash, is that a glock
@Downvote Trash, I think those are called ARAKs, looks similar to an AR but functions and shoots (7.62x39) like an AK
@Downvote Trash, guys, it is clearly lemonade
@Downvote Trash, I thought he was making a joke about how me and other liberals only know about AR-15s cause of the news and AK -47s thanks to Russia movies.
If I had 701 dollars Id buy 1402 cookies :)
Hope he has a license to sell that lemonade before someone shuts him down for it.
Nuke $2 Billion. Wait whats that? You cant buy a nuke? But my 2nd amendment rights?!
@Implicit88, ummm are you IMPLYING that MUH SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE not BEING INFRINGED UPON?? ILL HAVE YOU KNOW THAT NOT GIVING ME A NUCLEAR WEAPON JUST MAKES IT EASIER FOR CRIMINALS AND DRUG DEALERS TO GET THEM THANK YOU 🇺🇸💪💯😤👏
#snowflake destroyed #🍟🍔 #maga #make America Great again #get cucked
@liberachi , i want a nuke so when someone threatens me with a nuke i can launch it back at them. #ColdWar #Apocalypse #Defend2ndAmendment
@Implicit88, I love you are @liberachi’s circle jerk of confirmation bias. Keep it up!
@big freedom, i don't think you get what i am doing. I am simply pointing out inconsistencies in peoples perception of the constitution. All freedoms have limitations, courts have ruled this time and time again.
@Implicit88, of course there are limitations. But the straw-man “well I can have a nuke” is reductio ad absurdum.
@Implicit88, yeah, but this one can be argued with with firepower, not paper.
@big freedom, yes it is, but it serves to prove a point. Society should decide where to draw the line. I mean,this is exactly what the constitution allows. While you may realize there are limitations, a lot of people don't realize that or dont want there to be. I personally have no problem guns or good people with guns, but i have a problem with crazy people with guns.
@ImNotRacistBut, the raw firepower is greater, however at what point does one determine what too much firepower is for one person to have? Should this extend to unconventional weapons (i.e. Hacking, biological, natural resources)
@Implicit88, “society should decide”? How does that work out, Legally speaking? Ultra liberals like Liberachi would like to disarm everyone. You couldn’t get society to agree that ‘water is wet’... how do we come to an agreement on whether we can strip away someone’s right to defend themselves?
Btw I agree, I don’t think insane people should be allowed to own a gun. How do you force a diagnosis? Does everyone have to pass a mental health evaluation before buying?
@big freedom, its in the constitution. If you want to change an amendment it says how it needs to be done. If you want limitations law can be introduced in congress or state legislatures. Those questions you asked is exactly what we should be talking about right now. Not the no guns vs all guns movements. Forced mental review when buying CERTAIN guns can be a solution with a chance to appeal if you believe you have wrongly been categorized as an at risk individual. For example a handgun would have different requirements than a semi automatic weapon with a large clip size.
@liberachi , why do you always have to be an asshole?
@liberachi , yeah, F**k you Liberachi! You can’t take THESE guns!!
@Osama bin Dead, are you upset that I said it before you could?
@Osama bin Dead, because I just did it again, look two comments back up ;)
@Implicit88, I don’t want to change the constitution. Most people don’t. It would NEVER pass the states. The only thing I would like, is for people to read the articles and understand that “well regulated” meant “well armed” and “militia” is the term for not-regular military (so, literally everyone but the military), when they wrote the amendment.
@big freedom, correct but things change over time. Constitution has been amended over 25 times to date and it takes 3/4 vote (basically) to pass a change. Back in the day when that was written there was also no weapons with the firepower we have today. Hopefully one day we can find a balance and save lives.
@liberachi , no, just wondering why you constantly rip on people who defend their human and constitutional right. Am I not allowed to protect my life?
@Implicit88, frankly, yes there were. They had serious weaponry. Saying the founding fathers didnt predict weaponry would change over time is the same for the first amendment. If they didnt predict technology would advance, then the internet is not protected by the Constitution and should be banned. Please target criminals and the mentally ill and not the law abiding. Don’t take away our freedom, take away the criminal’s
@Osama bin Dead, i am by no means saying we should take away from a law abiding citizen. But they obviously didn't predict that we would be able to destroy entire states with a single bomb, if they did i am sure they would have included some form of limitations. We have limitations today because its obviously unreasonable to be able to hold that much power.
@Implicit88, well obviously an AR-15 can’t, but nuclear weapons can. I see no point for nuclear weapons because of the primary and secondary effects of them. Nuclear weapons have enough power to wipe out all of humanity. A semi-automatic rifle has many uses to average citizens. To stop mass shootings, we need to focus on mental health and parenting. Lock up your firearms in a safe and only the owner has the keys and combination to unlock it. Don’t make that a law, but it should be obvious, especially if the parents have a child with mental disabilities
I’d buy. My background wouldn’t be considered suitable for a number of reasons
When your lemonade tastes like piss and battery acid but you have a backup plan for making money
Finally, I can now make one stop when shopping
This idiot did this in downtown Nashville.
Magazine says ak
Thats the shjittist excuse of an ak 47 I have ever seen
Looking at the stock makes me think it's piston driven, so now I'm kinda leaning towards AK
Do you take checks?
$700?! I wouldn’t give him more than 350