GTP Alternative Cool Wall: 1949-present AK-47

1949-present AK-47

  • Total voters
    79
  • Poll closed .
Custom878
Bit of an exaggeration. I believe a Civic would be more comparable.
Click to expand...
I say that not because of who has one, but I say it because almost every time I hear my friends or someone else talking about guns, I hear about the AK-47.
 
Why are tanks cool, but guns uncool because they are designed to kill people? Tanks are designed to kill too. In fact, tanks are far more deadly than guns, so why would the AK-47 be any less cool than a tank?

Also, I find it very strange that Leonardo da Vinci, a man who invented many military weapons like the finned mortar and the steam cannon, which ended up killing millions over time, has a clear SZ consensus while the AK-47 is SU. I think both are SZ.
 
JMoney689
Why are tanks cool, but guns uncool because they are designed to kill people? Tanks are designed to kill too. In fact, tanks are far more deadly than guns, so why would the AK-47 be any less cool than a tank?
Click to expand...
Tanks are at best meh to me...
JMoney689
Also, I find it very strange that Leonardo da Vinci, a man who invented many military weapons like the finned mortar and the steam cannon, which ended up killing millions over time, has a clear SZ consensus while the AK-47 is SU. I think both are SZ.
Click to expand...
He made those, but he made many other great things that we probably wouldn't have a lot of technology we have today (if that makes sense, I worded it a bit weirdly.)
 
Technologically, i can see the value of this gun...

But it does change my view of it.... not cool...

As for Leonardo, despite his deadly inventions, he was a human being with a beautiful mind.... therefore cool...







Reading you all made me curious, so i will be visiting the real guns thread ;)
 
It's a gun. Not cool by its nature. I do appreciate the beauty of its engineering but when even the creator of such a think wishes he hadn't made it because of the lives taken with an AK then it simply cannot be cool.
 
JMoney689
Why are tanks cool, but guns uncool because they are designed to kill people? Tanks are designed to kill too. In fact, tanks are far more deadly than guns, so why would the AK-47 be any less cool than a tank?

Also, I find it very strange that Leonardo da Vinci, a man who invented many military weapons like the finned mortar and the steam cannon, which ended up killing millions over time, has a clear SZ consensus while the AK-47 is SU. I think both are SZ.
Click to expand...
Engineering machines 500 years ahead of the time takes a great mind. Pointing and pulling a trigger does not.
 
From an engineering perspective it's cool, but it's design purpose and function makes it uncool.
 
@Exorcet You're referring to guns as a whole in one sweeping statement. You may be accusing others of being overly specific, but in reality, you're just overgeneralising in an attempt to hide an undeniable truth, that truth being that fully automatic, military grade assault rifles are designed solely to be good at killing a lot of people very quickly. The clues in the name. Assault rifle.

There are many other types of firearm which are not designed with this purpose in mind. Some may be designed with the intention of being useful for animal control, while others may be designed with the intention of being useful for sports shooting.

We're not judging those here.

Exorcet
Take away advanced weapons and it becomes very simple for
Click to expand...
a group of oppressed people to revolt against their oppressors and bring peace and democracy to their nation.

Just a thought.
 
Every gun that gets nominated will never be anything but seriously uncool. :rolleyes:

Such an iconic weapon deserves a sub-zero from me.

Edit: I wonder what the polls will be like for the atomic bomb.
 
Roger the Horse
@Exorcet You're referring to guns as a whole in one sweeping statement. You may be accusing others of being overly specific, but in reality, you're just overgeneralising in an attempt to hide an undeniable truth, that truth being that fully automatic, military grade assault rifles are designed solely to be good at killing a lot of people very quickly. The clues in the name. Assault rifle.
Click to expand...
I'm being general because what I'm saying applies to basically every gun. No, not even assault rifles are pure killing machines. I specifically said that military weapons can be used as deterrence. The ability to kill does not imply desire or intent to kill. Ideally a military is a defensive organization that is funded to protect a nation from unprovoked harm. The AK-47 was a response to German automatic weapons and it was a response that needed to be made because if it was not built then the USSR would have been left vulnerable to automatic weapons. The USSR not being a perfect entity has misused weapons, as have other people/nations. Any unjust attack is a misuse of a weapon. The cause of the misuse is not the weapon itself, but the desires of the misuser.

There are many other types of firearm which are not designed with this purpose in mind. Some may be designed with the intention of being useful for animal control, while others may be designed with the intention of being useful for sports shooting.
Click to expand...
And these are quite capable of killing as well. The goals of their design being almost irrelevant. Whether or not they are used like murder tools is solely up to whoever is using them. This applies far beyond guns.

We're not judging those here.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to put forward the idea that a distinction doesn't really need to be made. In my view the tool is completely separate from its use. What it sounds like we agree on is that death isn't really a pleasant thing. You attribute deaths by AK-47 to the AK-47 because of its origin as a military weapon. I don't really care that someone was killed by an AK-47 instead of a kitchen knife or a lighter and some gas. It's just as bad if it's murder. It's true that a weapon like the AK-47 can make killing for "bad guys" easier at times, but the opposite is also true.


[Take away advanced weapons and it becomes very simple for] a group of oppressed people to revolt against their oppressors and bring peace and democracy to their nation.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't surprise me if a step on the way to oppression was disarmament. Everyone starts with nothing. One person might want to steal from another. For the person defending, there's as much chance of failure as there is success. As a result that person might look for a way to better the odds of success. Once this happens the aggressor faces increased risk, unless that person also puts in the effort to come up with a better method or tool. This goes on an on. You could hypothetically lock the situation at its initial condition, but that doesn't really benefit anyone.


Also, if weapon development is abandoned by peaceful people, that leaves the most powerful weapons in destructive hands. It's one reason that I'm glad nuclear weapons were invented long ago. No one can invent one tomorrow and suddenly become unstoppable.
 
It's intended purpose doesn't even matter. It's still a weapon commonly associated with criminals, terrorists, and rednecks, so there goes any chance of it being cool.
 
Custom878
It's still assault rifle used by uncool people to do uncool things. If it was something else, then I would expect different ratings.
Click to expand...
So it's because of the association with the userbase?

I see the T-34 did well. I'm gonna assume a poll on the Messerschmidt ME262 would do badly, even though it's the world's first jet powered aircraft.
 
Roger the Horse
a group of oppressed people to revolt against their oppressors and bring peace and democracy to their nation.
Click to expand...

Nope.

A standing army that trains, night and day, with their fists, their feet, their swords, their spears, their bows... will be more than able to stave off any civilian revolt.

A professional soldier is called a professional because he is adept at combat and killing.

Sometimes, a revolt can work, if the military is weak or disorganized... but often, it requires the rebels to have soldiers of their own.

Guns, on the other hand, level the playing field. Particularly simple guns. And this is the beauty of the AK47. It requires little training to use, to clean and to maintain.

It turns Peasants into Police. Farmers into Soldiers. Children into Generals. Commoners into Kings.

In any scenario in which a David is taking on a Goliath in the modern world, the AK47 is the slingshot.

This is not to say all Davids are virtuous. Often, it seems quite the opposite.

But there is no denying that few weapons in these times have been as important in the modern struggle of nations/classes/races/ideologies as the AK47.

As such... assigning a petty, bourgeios label to it as cool or uncool seems unfitting.

Abstained.
 
Last edited:
I love this gun, it gets the job done, I don't care if it's not as good as any modern gun, but it's still Seriously Uncool because it was invented to kill.
 
Custom878
It just screams "military" to me.
Click to expand...
That's it - "military" IS cool.

haitch40
The AK74 is updated yes and better. The Colt M1911 is a gun I hold in very high regard because of it being so good for the time it was made.
Yes the US keeps using the M16 but isn't it updated? Some designs can be better just by being updated for example the B52 bomber. Although newer weapons such as the FN SCAR seem to perform better don't they? (Being from a country where guns are illegal I only have a basic knowledge of guns but still from what I have seen the AK47 is starting to look a bit old.)
Click to expand...
The "update" of guns usually includes stronger and lighter materials, sights, scope mounts, grips, rails and all that stuff, but no serious change in the design. The old AKM can still shoot well (if it's maintained properly, of course) - you just have higher recoil with the 7.62x39 cartridge (but it has its advantages, too). The Russian special forces still use the AKMS (AKM with folding stock) upgraded with rails/grips/sights/anything else they need.

The Reisen wasn't always the same, too (A6M1 => A6M6), but you can remember the legendary Bf.109, which debuted in the Spanish civil war, but had incredible potential for modernizations and the late versions (109G and K) were quite up to date to the very end of WWII (and even after it - Israel used the former Nazi planes in 1948 :D).
Planes are a lot more sophisticated than guns so they get outdated a lot quicker.

The FN SCAR - yes, but it's more expensive, sophisticated and requires more advanced maintainance, so it's used by special forces only. It's like AN-94 compared to the AK-74.

Custom878
It's intended purpose doesn't even matter. It's still a weapon commonly associated with criminals, terrorists, and rednecks, so there goes any chance of it being cool.
Click to expand...
What about the AK-74M then? It is used for fighting terrorists/criminals, not by them.
E39SxxP80Is.jpg


JAHHAJ
I love this gun, it gets the job done, I don't care if it's not as good as any modern gun, but it's still Seriously Uncool because it was invented to kill.
Click to expand...
Nawp. It's invented to protect the country it was made in, and it makes this well. :cool:
 
voPuUNbL4f0.jpg

JAHHAJ
It's been said before that having to protect your country isn't cool in the first place plus, protecting your country involves killing and that is definitely not cool.
Click to expand...
Protecting your country means that someone you protect it from is coming to kill you and your countrymen, and a weapon lets you protect your freedom and your very existence. This can't be uncool.

I mean, a war is uncool of course, but something that lets you win it if it happens cannot be uncool.
 
Rage Racer
Protecting your country means that someone you protect it from is coming to kill you and your countrymen, and a weapon lets you protect your freedom and your very existence. This can't be uncool.

I mean, a war is uncool of course, but something that lets you win it if it happens cannot be uncool.
Click to expand...
The fact that people are trying to kill you and your countrymen is uncool.
 
Exorcet
What.


What of preventing them from doing that with no casualties? I mean that line kind of sounds like saying cars and uncool because they break down and people steal them.
Click to expand...
Put it this way, using a gun to protect your country, involves hurting someone and can involve killing which is what these kind of guns were invented for which makes the uncool because killing is uncool, simple as.
 
The thing is, you don't need to kill/injure to make use of a gun. At times you don't even need to shoot.
 

Similar threads

Roger the Horse
  • Poll
GTP Alternative Cool Wall: 1957-present United States Machine Gun, Caliber 7.62 mm, M60
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Slash
Slash
Roger the Horse
  • Poll
GTP Alternative Cool Wall: 1970-Present ATC/ATV Offroad Trail Riding
Replies
22
Views
2K
Bopop4
Bopop4
Roger the Horse
GTP Alternative Cool Wall: Results (read OP)
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
Lizard
Lizard

Latest Posts

Back