Slashdot Mirror
Missouri Car Dealer To Give Away AK-47 With New Truck
Frizbie writes "Max Motors in Butler, Missouri is giving away free AK-47 assault rifles with the purchase of a new truck. The promotion starts in the beginning of August. The video of CNN's coverage of the promotion shows Mark Muller being interviewed by a woman who was taking a very strong stand against what Muller had to say; however, it seems to have backfired pretty heavily."
Do want!
Buy now and they'll include a big Johnny Reb flag and a six-pack of Old Style.
Fucking hillbillies.
I was going to comment but this kind of stupidity really inflames me and I honestly don't have the time to explain all the ways I see this as wrong. Thank god it's not in my state.
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." ~Ozzy Osborne
don't get me wrong, I'm against this promotion of giving away AK-47s with the cars, but I don't understand what this lady is trying to do. Her job is to report the news, and to report on what the story is about, not to argue with a man they brought in to interview over her own opinion and history. There is a difference between interviewing, and stating a completely separate opinion. The members of the media should not be injecting their opinion into their reporting.
There might be a picture (as the linked story says) of an AK-47 assault rifle on that page, but (even aside from the mentioned fact that it's a voucher, not a gun, that buyers get) they almost certainly won't be buying an assault rifle, just a lookalike. Unless the dealer is somehow magically and illegally supplying them all with selective-fire capability. Pretty tough (expensive, long process) for ordinary Americans to buy any guns with selective (or plain full-auto) guns; those are only for the gub'mint, not the Pipple.
Just Say Nope to object-vilification through word choice :)
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
An Ak-47 is a hell of a gun an AR won't go through what an AK can.
I'm going to move to Missouri and buy a truck from this guy!
Its not a true ak-47 at the price he's offering the voucher for. A real one, would be in the thousands ( legal that is, i have no idea the black market value ), so its just a semi-automatic rifle.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You know why you carry a gun, Because carrying a police officer would be heavy. Police can not save you in quick situations where a few seconds tons of things can happen.
The tone of the interviewer doesn't bother me and neither does the promotion. She does make clear her opinion and allows the interviewee a full chance to respond his except at one point where she restates it and then forces the next question (Hardly, an O'Riely/Hannity/Asshat moment tho') . If the interview wasn't couched as a controversial promotion it would just be an advert for the dealership. True, really good interviewer would be trying to drill down to expose the heart of an argument, but the Car Salesman showed the insite to do that for her. The real discussion is one of moral imperatives and the rift between them is one of philosophies that cannot find accord except through conflict and compromise. Nothing wrong with exposing that conflict.
You can't save the world but can save your life.
No brain, no pain.
the AK-47 is, by definition, an assault rifle. It is designed for attack. It has a long range, and will shoot through your house and all the houses within a straight line of your shot for 1/4 mile. A sawed off shotgun is much better for dealing with an intruder in at your door when you've just been woken up by them shooting the dog. Also, a nice pack of dobermans will probably protect your home better than any gun.
If the body armor does stop it, they'll be flat on their backs regardless.
conservation of energy does mean that it won't gain energy in flight, so it will not impact with any more energy than what the gun put into the shooter first (except for a recoiless, or mounted gun.) With a person running at you, unless they are too light to shoot the same load without being knocked on their ass, the bullet wont either. So yeah unleash a double barrel 10 gauge and you will both be sitting on you asses, assuming both hit the target. Your going to want something with penetration (small caliber) if worried about body armored entry.
My choice would be something like a hollow point, specifically designed to prevent a second hit, it may go through the wall, but not likely a person, and will likely be non lethal at that point.
A ballistic tip, or a black talon load should be better at getting through the jacket, and not having any next room, or next person issues either.
At least make it an AR15 instead of what is likely some ex soviet bloc knockoff - although my guess is that would cost twice as much for them to do....
AK's are great if you get a decent one...Very reliable weapons, but the variation in quality is so wide that unless you know what you're getting, you don't REALLY know what you're getting.
You can see how the fact that this dealer is doing this is generating publicity; very successfully I might add - look at us discussing this, we're all over the world and we're talking about a car dealer in Missouri. It's because it's controversial....It shouldn't be, but it is, because it scares some people. It shouldn't - but it does.
It's too bad that a large percentage of the populace is so ignorant about firearms and have lost touch with this aspect of American heritage; the only exposure they really have is through TV, movies, news reports, and fanatical anti-gun organizations - and it's universally negative and threatening.
Guns are tools, pure and simple, and only as dangerous or evil as the person using it. If the people trying to get rid of guns could actually snap their fingers and make all guns in the entire world past and future disappear and never have existed, then maybe they might actually accomplish what they are setting out to do - if they could do that, I might even sign on.....But that's just not reality - and the founders of this country - as imperfect as they were with their slaves and wealth and selfish reasons for some of the things they did - they did recognize that their fledgling republic could (and likely would) end up under tyranny at some point in the future if the people didn't have the right to stay armed.
There are situations that can happen, even in modern day America where anybody who has really thought about it is likely going to want to be armed or be with someone they trust who is armed; I know I will - any major civil emergency for starters....In live in a major American city, and I can guarantee you that if all power was cut, once we reached the 48 hour point it would be a very uncivilized and dangerous cutthroat place.
Wow, talk about missing the point.
There is a high chance that having a reenforced door (for the same price or less than a gun) WILL actively help you if/when someone tries to break into your house.
There is a low chance that carrying a gun will help you in the "big world out there", because most people panic when hit by emergency situations.
Just try to punch someone really hard in the face. Just that simple thing gets people panicked enough that they don't event think of kicking back. Just because they don't know how to react (I'm talking about a real punch, one that makes you stagger...).
The point was: if you need to spend 500$ on your security, better spend on your home security if you want a better ROI.
And just exactly which hands are the right hands to wield lethal weapons? I don't know, I'm not inclined to accept this person's (or anyone else's) opinion about who are the "right" people. But then, I'm just not a big fan of shooting people.
So because meth addicts are now here, people need 50yr old Russian automatic rifles...
If meth addicts are so much of a problem in Missouri or anywhere, the best solution is to give away high purity meth for free. They will kill themselves in a very short amount of time. their death will be an example to others to maybe steer clear of that drug.... problem solved.
The 'right hands' are anyone who buys a truck from them, of course. Because only people who obey the law buy guns legally and people who don't obey the law only buy guns illegally. Taking away the chance to buy these semi-automatic assault rifles legally means they're going to end up in the wrong hands otherwise.
To be honest, I could live with them offering the handgun again, but an assault rifle is insane. I wonder if I get a voucher for a grenade launcher next year.
*goes back to reading the Butter Battle book* Yeah, I just went there. -Anon
You're missing the fact that the shooter of the slug is accelerating it over the 2ft length of the shotgun barrel, and the body armor is stopping it in a few inches.
A shotgun can easily put an unwary shooter off-balance, so it would do worse to the target. Knocking them down might be marginal, but they'll be severely hurting and knocked around.
Myth busters did bust this myth twice as well
The difference in 2 feet vs 3in would be 12 milliseconds instead of 1.5 ms. Since it is still the same amount of energy hitting both the gun holder, and the thief. So barring a outside force they would each reach the same speed, the only difference is the shooter would have 1/8th of the acceleration rate, but for 8 times as long of period of time, with both eventually reaching the same final velocity change.
So the shooter has a extra 11 milliseconds to counteract the force than the target would have. With the average reaction of a human being @ ~215 ms, their is no way that you have had any muscle reactions to make any counter force during that extra 11ms.
>A shotgun can easily put an unwary shooter off-balance, so it would do worse to the target.
only if the target was either hit at a higher location in the body than the shooter, or if the target had less momentum (IE running away, not towards the shooter. kinda defeats the purpose of knocking them down if they are running away already.)
>they'll be severely hurting and knocked around.
The question was more about hitting a bullet proof vest that stops the bullet, compared to say a 22-250 rifle that has more kick than a shotgun slug, and a much smaller projectile, it will lose less energy getting to the target, thus have more knockdown momentum, and more penetration power if a vest is in the way (but a hollow point expands similarly, after impact). Therefore a all around better solution IMHO. Only advantage to the shotgun I can think of is it has more flexibility in ammunition (alternate slugs, and shot for example), and a pump action has a very distinctive sound, that is more intimidating than just silence before the shot (if you want to "give notice".)