Kentucky Ballistics, Administrative Results, Brandon Herrera, and Forgotten Weapons are all great RUclips channels for anyone interested in more on the various weapons mentioned. Edit: Garand Thumb, hickok45, and Paul Harrell also deserve to be mentioned here as noted below
Kentucky Ballistics (KB) almost always focuses on large-bore rifles. However, has a sub-series on his channel commonly called "how lethal is it" which often features the testing of less than lethal weapons. Administrative Results is more broad, and I think there are many video overlaps. Forgotten Weapons (FW) is much more history of weapons/historical weapons focus, and does not answer or pose any questions. FW is a great source for research, but not so much for follow-up from this video. Brandon Herrera is... Deeply problematic. Yes, Brandon Herrera has good videos around gunsmithing like his AK-50 project (A 50 BMG rifle built around AK family architecture).Yes, his "cursed weapons" series are both interesting and funny. However, the politics and hot takes that often accompany his videos are either a dog whistle, an echo chamber, or a sudden turn depending on your life perspective.
I am as pro-gun as you can possibly get, and I have written papers on guns and "gun violence". You are infinitely more accurate than mainstream media (MSM) on the topic of guns. Thank you. I can only pray that the MSM becomes as honest and as good as you.
@@philipbriney4430Way too powerful cartridge full sending lead at mach fuck (has there ever been a faster firing MG?) weighing in at a-lot with overall way-too-much length. Yeah I wouldn't wannna wave that absolute unit around
Assault weapons are not assault rifles. Assault rifle is a very specific machine with a very specific list of parts and features. Assault weapon is a made up legal term that is nebulous and vague in scope so that it can be applied to anything you please
@@NINacide There is nothing specific about the "definition" of assault rifle. It's a purely political term that means whatever the people using it want it to mean.
@@AJHart-eg1ys You're thinking of 'assault weapon.' Assault Rifle does have a specific definition as discussed in this video. 'Assault weapon' just means whatever the person saying the words wants to ban.
Wasn't expecting a reasonable video about "scary black rifles" from a Brit today, but here we are. Cheerio, Simon. Here's to hoping your homeland gets their whole INGSOC situation figured out soon.
You tanks are so fecking ignorant, you really are. Here I am in the UK with two dozen firearms, three of which are AR platform. I own more than the average Yank and I know plenty of British folks who own firearms too.
I’ve been saving this comment for a few years so I’m gonna choose my words very carefully. I think Simon was honestly surprised at the level of military interest in the RUclips community. I don’t think (early videos) he and his team thought they would do as well as they did, hence they focused after (rightly so), on similar content. Having said that, I “feel” like Simon has actually become truly interested in this topic (as opposed to just narrating on it). My passion is firearm education, I find joy in just teaching about guns, getting people interested in guns, how they work, why , the history. Ive seen Simon’s team get educated, the tone changes, the script is more fair, balanced, ACCURATE (lord thank you), the team has really brought it to the next level of education. Thank you, with sincere gratitude
@@breachfirearms5753 I agree that this channel has become particularly good about accuracy and authentic info about weaponry. However, I believe the defining factor is the addition of Gilles Messier to the writing staff. Seriously, check out his channel "Our Own Devices" which focuses almost exclusively on military and paramilitary equipment (including weapons of all types). That man is a proper firearms engineer, like myself. The sort of folks who don't necessarily shoot as often as we should but obsessively focus on the mechanical aspect of firearms development. Our collections tend to include unique mechanisms like the Cz53, Chiappa Rhino, Browning Auto 5 (or clones), Bullpups (especially the Ps90), etc... Basically, folks like him and I are particularly interested in the design and function, gunsmithing for short, similar to a mechanic or blacksmith, as opposed to outright implementation like a soldier, racecar driver, or knight.
Irrelevant as hunting has nothing to do with 2A. But yeah, AR15's are chambered in varmint rounds and intermediate rounds that barely best magnum revolver energies. The average "hunting rifle" round like a .30-06 or 7mm-08 are far more powerful, and those are pretty moderate small arms compared to some of the big .338 Norma Mag's, big bore stopping rifles, etc
Simon, again, Texas gun guy here. Outstanding video about the AR. It's nice to see so.eone ACTUALLY give the facts and the history, along with definitions and not take a side either way. Thanks for that sir, we'll done.
@@collincutler4992 yea I was impressed too, usually when you see a video like this online it's just a lecture about how we should surrender our rights so the boot can rest more comfortably on our necks. Well done on Simon.
Nevada gun guy here, agreed. This is a very refreshing video to watch, with no silliness or bias. Actual facts and history, actually teaching. Rare W RUclipsr.
Gilles Messier is an extreme gun enthusiast if you go check out his Our Own Devices channel. :-) He writes all our gun based content here, as well as our second most prolific author overall outside of me. But I started TIFO so the fact that he is rapidly catching me up... He's great and an amazing research and writer. :-) Also a genuine genius. :-) If you like his stuff here, for real go check him out on Our Own Devices. Super good channel. -Daven
@@TodayIFoundOutGod tier my friend. I really respect you so much after watching. My only point of contention was your take on the Israeli-Palestine war and it wasn’t to do with you being biased. It was more so the info you learned from probably trusted sources that was biased towards defending the actions of the Nazi, and then genocidal nationalist, Muslims which became the main culture of the modern day “Palestinian”. Their culture is one of abuse and manipulation, and a large debatable percentage of Palestinians are directly settlers/immigrants who moved to Jewish created communities. There was only 1-2 places that could be argued to be a town/community in the lands of Palestine extending into what is now Jordan and Egypt (the original full lands). The history clearly shows that Jewish people always bought their land and developed open communities, and that the “Palestinians” were either fine with Jewish majoirty or leadership, or they were Muslim Nationalists or influenced by the genocidal Muslims. In fact despite the leader of what became the Palestinian people after the war was actually a Nazi general before the war with Israel and tried to get Hitler to help him genocide the Jews. During the Balfour declaration discussions the British were clearly going to give a one state to the “Arabs/Muslim nationalists” aka the people that Palestinians claim to be their own ancestors or “people”. But the Arabs openly stated that they were going to forcefully remove and kill the Jewish people in Palestine. That’s why the British handed it to the UN and the only reason a two state solution happened. Then the British and UN abandoned the Jewish people… but the British didn’t want to fight any wars or conflicts for the Jews, but it was right after WWII and the British absolutely could not give a complete state to the Muslims who openly intended to genocide the Jews, many of which were refugees. You can read the documents and there’s a video that reads their discussions for you. The Arabs were open and honest about this the whole process and said these things up until recent times. Because modern liberals for some reason project their own morality and can’t see the truth, these important facts are just left out. But those facts are key to the discussion even if you are anti Israeli. But even stating basic facts will get you called racist or crazy despite the fact that this is open and clear history which the Palestinians openly admitted to. So even if the numbers are closer to the Palestinians having heritage before the Jews came in 1880, there were no communities nevertheless identities until the Jews came (with 1-2 exceptions that were isolated), and the modern day Palestinians are more Nazi/Muslim Nationalist influence and culture than they are the original people that lived there. We also forgot how the Muslims did openly genocide Jews across the middle East and we can assume they would have done the same to Israel and they also openly stated their intent to do so during all of the conflicts. Also the whole “violence escalated” is such a lie. The “Palestinians” kept escalating racism and violence and their leaders encouraged and funded it in the goal of Muslim nationalism. The Jewish people didn’t come close to equal responses and the main people and government openly worked hard to stop violence and escalation by random civilians. So we have systemic funding of terrorism by the Palestinians and we have systemic influence to avoid conflict and act morally by the Jewish people. Violence by the Jews was independent of what the Muslim Nationslists (aka ancestors of modern Palestinians) were doing. These are clearly recorded in history by the writings and documents from these two groups. Whether they both even objectively did the same in harm or whatever else you think, what makes the largest difference is the open genocidal intent of the Palestinians as a people, and the deescalation of conflict by the Jewish people as a group. We have to hold some responsibility based upon what the leadership and govt of a group of people are trying to do and their intentions. The difference here is clear, especially since the Palestinians clearly committed and escalated conflict over and over before any perceived “response” happened by Jewish people. I hope you get a chance to research and explore this, Netanyahu has a great historically accurate book and actually multiple books that don’t have many/any refutations. You can research to see what was refuted or criticized as not historically accurate too, and his books were obviously targeted by many people trying to disprove the history in them. That’s some of the stuff I’ve learned about the history, I may be wrong about some of it and please feel free to respond with what you know or find. If you could make a new episode I’d love that so much, and you can at least focus on the Jordan Peterson interviewing Netanyahu video on RUclips. He summarized what was in his book which has few if anything that has been disproven when it comes to history. Obviously search more but that’s a great place to start with the stuff that is left out completely from modern knowledge.
@@TodayIFoundOutBTW, I don't mean to disparage the assault rifle portion of the video. While I think I could write most of the script from memory, I always learn something. The AK - stamped to machined to stamped - was something I didn't know.
What defines an assault rifle is: • It’s black • it has scary things that stick out of it • It has a scary name like “BLT 57“ • it has collapsing parts, so it can be concealed in a shirt or pants pocket • It has “magazines” that hold millions of those bullet things
In 1998, I was a Midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy. One day, Mikhail Kalashnikov visited and had lunch with us. While I didn't personally meet him, we gave him a GIGANTIC standing ovation when the Brigade Commander announced our special guest.
I'm surprised RUclips let you publish a mostly-accurate and factual report about firearms, and that they let you get away with showing standard capacity magazines.
@@trevorodell5564 Probably just stock images. I'm happy Simon was able to make this video, but once again it shows how unevenly RUclips applies its policies.
Here is the part that often gets overlooked, especially by people from other countries. The 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with sport or hunting. It's who purpose is to put military power in the hands of civilians in case the government tries to go full Putin. The fact that an AR-15 has military use fits right in with the intent of the 2nd. Plus, as others have no doubt said here, the things that make it valuable in a military sense have nothing to do with the power of it's round. The AR-15 fires a very light round when compared to most deer hunting calibers. An AR-15 was designed to be light and easily portable, for a soldier that might have to carry the damned thing 50 miles on foot. The intermediate round gives it a lot of carried ammunition without weighing a lot either. In short, it's not the power of the AR-15 that makes it a military weapon, it is the light weight and portability that makes Armies love it.
The AR -15 was never fielded by the military… it is not a military weapon…the AR15 is strictly a civilian semi automatic variant and visibly identical to the military variant (M16/M4) but without the giggle switch and third pin hole giving full auto or 3 round burst capability.(depending on the fire control parts installed
@@ParasitikOne That is fairly common knowledge. However, the AR-15 is the gun that is on the front page of these discussions. Plus, a civilian AR-15 would make a fine military rifle. Full auto is not used much except in close ranged fights or if crap has gone really south.
Well after the end of the cold war, there was an event where Eugene Stoner and Kalashnakova met, shook hands, and shot guns. The Russian gun designer was shocked at the fact that American made millions off of his design, and the American was shocked that the Russian was just given a handshake and a medal, with no money paid for the AK design.
Tbh a better guest would have been Jim Sullivan, everyone who actually knows the AR platform knows that Stoner had an ego and Sullivan was the real MVP of the design
Gotta love communism. No matter what greatness you achieve you won't see a dime unless you're in the party. If you're in the party you're more equal than the rest regardless of you being a useless waste of organic matter
Kalashnikov. Kalashnikova is the feminine version of the name. The only time that would be accurate would be if you were speaking about his wife or daughter
Kalashnakova never designed AK, just used the name, Schmeisser did he design. I am shocked that folks believe in the myth that illiterate guy can write New York best seller.
As a "gun nut" with a humble but slightly larger than average rifle collection all I have to say is that if I had to choose between an M1 Garand and an AR15 to get shot at with I would pick neither, but the AR15 comes in second. Especially at any range of 100 yards or more. People don't tend to understand the power behind a "full power" rifle round and the kind of damage it can do.
@@bdkj3e I meant less about keyholing and more about how fudds talk up the 5.56's lethality by justifying it's horrible ballistics by saying the tumbling makes it more deadly.
Full power is indeed more powerful, but in skilled hands, an assault rifle is a lot more dangerous. That being said, your average deranged gunman is hardly a skilled operator.
Thank you Simon and team. Regardless of where you personally stand, or your nation's particular laws and culture, you presented a facts-first overview of the Assault Rifle/Weapon history and the US's modern internal debate. If anyone on your team were personally against such topics, I applaud their journalistic integrity to deliver the facts as they are, without cherry-picking or bias. If any on your team are arms enthusiasts, the lack of bias or attempts to push agenda speaks to your journalistic integrity and commitment. This is what SHOULD HAPPEN and so very much doesn't from news, education, or true informational outlets. While I am biased, and am definitely far on one side of my nation's internal debate, having a source that is "clean" to be used to get anyone 'up-to-speed' on the actual facts is a true modern treasure among the internet's normal desert. Long time viewer, subsciber, and supporter, thank you. (Oh, and this is a 2fer for me... I'm also using this as examples on what unbiased fact-based reporting should look like.)
U could show this to the anti gunners I don't think most would care because they would rather carry on than admit they were wrong it's a shame but it is what it is
@@AliceBowie "sporting rifle" is a joke, the second ammendment protects military armaments and thus all citizens should be able to purchase any rifle, suppressor, or other such arms as they wish
I was taught when I studied firearms history, in my first year of my gunsmithing course, an assault rifle is capable of fully automatic fire, it has to use a larger than pistol calibur, if it uses a pistol calibur, then its an smg, It can not ever be an assault rifle if it is only capable of semi-automatic fire..
@MrCashewkitty they are grouped together for simplicity, along with machine pistols, the same thing can have different classifications by different countries, the MP40 was a Machine Pistol by German standards, but an SMG by British standards, the Sten was classed as a pistol calibur carbine by the british, but as an SMG by pretty much everyone else. . . There is a whole varience of classifications, some due to if it has a stock or not. . . . Its much easier just to have the catagories of . Rifle, Semi automatic or bolt action. SMG, Pistol calibur, fully automatic capable. Assault Rifle, small to intermediate rifle calibur, fullly automatic capable. Automatic Rifle/Battle rifle, full rifle calibur, fully automatic capable, still single man operatable. Then your into your LMGs, MGs and other team operated weapons. If it hets more complicated than that, your starting to risk certain political parties being able to try a group large armounts of weapons under blanket bans and restrictions.
@@MrCashewkittySMGs go brrrrrr and PCCs don't. And SMGs are heavily restricted as they are machineguns while PCCs are semi auto, therefore fine. Except if a PCC is an open bolt gun, in which case even tho it's semi auto it's counted as a machinegun because laws make perfect sense as always
I’m only 18 minutes into the video and I have to say bravo! Well done! You give the proper definition of an assault rifle and even point out the difference in an AK47 and AKM! I’m impressed!
Assault rifle means full automatic fire. AR-15's that civilians use are NOT full automatic and can only fire one shot per trigger pull. Civilian AR's and AK-47's are NOT assault rifles!!
The law passed in the 90's used the phrase "assault weapon" specifically so they could dodge the Military classification of an "assault rifle" and just make up whatever they wanted.
Maaaaowzer. Watch the forgotten weapons channel for much much more detail. CnArsenal is also fantastic for this, CnA cover every small arm of ww1 and now moving to ww2. Both are deeply technical in detail. This video is a great overview and feels pretty accurate. Beard’s looking on point Simon!
Thank you for accurately explaining the truth about “assault rifles.” As a gun owner, it is very annoying to hear non-gun owners on TV discussing things they don’t understand at all.
@@SafetySpooon The problem is what Simon covered at 17:05. We can debate all day about who should own firearms, what their purpose is, what the US 2nd Amendment means, and what capabilities should be available to civilians. Now is neither the time nor the place, but we could. What isn't up for debate is this. For 10 years in the US a piece of plastic, which can be snapped on and off a barrel, was the difference between a legal gun and a felony. It's like declaring every car with a spoiler, including the Toyota Prius, a "tactical vehicle." Then throwing anyone who owns one in jail. Extending the analogy further, minivan with a spoiler would be "straight to jail." It's absurd and detracts from real important discussions.
@@arthurmoore9488VERY well said Mr.Moore. I haven’t finished listening to Simon’s 3 hour! definition; I loath getting lectured about the evils of gun ownership from people whose country is burning to the ground around them. That includes any blue city denizen, American or otherwise. Based on the comments, Simon has done a proper job of it. Really though, what’s not to understand about freedom, tyranny and what is required to sustain the former and destroy the latter.
@@nin29nin Just be glad you aren't in Washington, our legislators literally made up terms and twisted definitions such as "assault weapon" to create a blanket ban on damn near everything and pass some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, even the SKS is listed under prohibited items
The head of the ATF can't even disassemble a Glock which is completely dumb if you are in charge of making laws about guns you should be educated in them so many politicians think an AR round makes a massive hole in people or the number of bullets in the magazine means thats how many it can shoot per trigger pull 😂😂 always a good laugh to look up "politicians completely clueless about guns"
Learning something would be completely antithetical to their goals. Ignorance allows unfettered tyranny and plausible denieability. I like your hope, though.
@@noonespecial9840 Look, I get it. It's easy to see people as wanting to control everything. But, do you really thing that woman who sawed the barrel off her husband's AR for a political ad really cares about firearms? She thought she was "destroying" it while publicly committing a felony. Pretty far from "unfettered tyranny" to me.
The ultimate irony is that Eugene Stoner and Mikhail Kalashnikov - the guys who created the most iconic weapons for the deadliest war that never happened and a hundred wars in the meantime - admired each others work, became very good friends, and kept a correspondence.
An objective factual examination on what an assault rifle is, pointing out that "assault weapon" is a nebulous term based only on cosmetics and then ending the segment with saying that the gun control debate is outside the scope of the channel. Bravo, Simon. My respect for you increased even more.
A weapon is nothing without the will and skill of the operator. I am the true weapon. Everything else is an extension of my desire to accomplish what I set out to.
I hunt big and small game in America and I was deployed to Iraq during the surge as a turret gunner, I firmly believe that falling to the ground when shot is mostly psychological and a bit physical but it can easily be trained out. Getting in a gunfight is very stressful and creates a lot of adrenaline, a dump of adrenaline causes a loss in motor functions (fight flight or freeze) Getting shot in a gunfight and crumpling seems to mostly be a civilian thing. I know of several cases where a guy is shot and doesn't know it until after the gunfight and dies almost immediately after the adrenaline wears off enough so that we train to recognize if this is happening. If you aren't used to doing high stress things in a high adrenaline environment I think you probably will crumple down if you've been shot on top of all that is going on already. Most people in a civilian environment don't even realize they are being shot at until they get hit.
This was the most factual and correct video I have ever seen about assault rifles and their origins I have ever seen from a non-gun enthusiast channel. No cringing or shouting at my computer from me this time!
Originally 'AR' stood for ARmalite, not Armalite Rifle. The AR-9 and AR-17 are shotguns, the AR-24 is a 9mm pistol, and the AR-22 and 23 are training devices for Mk19 grenade launchers! But it became such a common misconception that Armalite (which is not the original company, which went bust in the '80's), now goes along with the designation of AR as Armalite Rifle.
There is only 1 named assault rifle ever fielded by any nation. It was Germany's Stürmgewehr StG44. The Storm Rifle. The US Military HAS NEVER NAMED A CLASS OF WEAPONS AS ASSAULT. Now let's go into Eugene Stoner as his contributions to modern weapons. While working as a small arms designer for the Armalite Corporation, itself a division of a major military aircraft company, Mr. Stoner designed an entire series of weapons with AR followed by a number. Some were pilot's survival rifles that broke down into a compact form and fired .22LR. He later designed the AR-10 chambered in .308 to meet a bid proposal to replace the M1 Carbine in 1953. That design lost out to the M-14. He later redesigned the AR-10, chambering a variant of the .221 Winchester varmint cartridge and removed the select fire capability. That gun is the AR-15, and the weapon was also passed over for the M-14. The .221 Winchester morphed into the .222 Winchester and ultimately with minor case changes becam the .223 Remington. All are considered target shooting and varmint hunting calibers. 1957 rolls around and an Air Force General is touring Armalite. The General spots an AR-15, Eugene asks if the General wants to shoot watermelons with it. The General has a blast, and asks for a few hundred of them to give to his Strategic Airlift Command security troops. Armalite calls up Colt to produce under license. 1963 rolls around, and an Army General is hanging out with the Air Force General. Army General drools over the fancy rifle and is told to contact Colt. Colt seds a batch of 250, the Army isn't happy with it being a semi-automatic gun and starts requesting changes. First change is change .223 Reminton to 5.56x57mm NATO. That creates feeding and headspacing issues, so the forward assist is added, and while Colt is at it, make it full-auto. Then the Army says: " We need to use surplus WW2 gunpowder in the 5.56 NATO round." That creates chamber pressure issues, cases welding to the chamber, case head separation, and more nasty surprises. Mr. Stoner designs a new, modular rifle in 1963, his Stoner 63 series of guns.
Yes, the US military actually has named a class of weapons as "assault rifles". They did so back in the 1970's in an official US Army document entitled: "US Army intelligence document FSTC-CW-07-03-70, November 1970" In this document they define an assault rifle as: "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges." That is on page 67 of the document where it also talks about the AK-47 and AKM. Hell the header for that page is "SECTION III: ASSAULT RIFLES" While you are right in the fact that no specific single weapon other than the StG44 has had the word assault in its name, to say that the US military has never called anything an "assault rifle(s)" isn't true.
@Evinthal84 That definition doesn't apply to any US or Allied made arms(NATO/UN) save for the Israeli Galil, which in itself takes design cues from the AK and AR pattern rifles and was chambered in .308 To military planners at the time, a full-powered rifle cartridge was seen as .30-06, 7.62x54R, or 8mm Mauser. The Remington .223/5.56mm is classed as a sub-caliber rifle round in military use, and for sporting use it is classified as a Varmint caliber rated to hunt animals dog-sized and smaller. Even the new 6.5mm(.25 caliber) round being adopted by the Army is still considered a sub-caliber round. When used for hunting at the limit of it's effective range, it lacks the power to drop a big horn ram and is useless against deer.
I'm from Texas and have LOTS of guns...even have an AR in my trunk. People are so scared of it, yet I have 2 hip holstered revolvers that will put 6 holes jn the side of an engine block of a semi...but of course they don't have all that scary black plastic on it ;)
I live off-grid on 20 acres of remote mountain wilderness, 8 miles from the county jail and 3 miles from a "young men's prison" where inmates are younger than 21, but convicted of serious felonies. We also have lots of large predators; pumas, bears, lynx, bobcat, wolves, coyotes, and weirdos who are addicted to meth (the scariest predators here). EVERYONE who lives here owns guns! Most of us do not own ARs, as we need something that can stop an angry bear or mountain lion with one shot, and the small caliber AR doesn't cut it. Funny thing, no one here poses for Facebook selfies holding our firearms. Those who keep guns for protection prefer not to advertise what firepower we happen to own. It's more of a "eff around and find out" kind of thing. A delightful neighbor lived out here for more than 30 years, alone. She died a few years back of natural causes, at age 88. She lived successfully alone, on her own terms. Lilly is a legend around here! We all knew that one does not simply go up and knock on her door if they valued their lives. Years back, a teenage prison escapee came to her door and met her .357 magnum. She didn't shoot him, but she sure scared the beejeebers out of him!
America loves to overcomplicate what is and is not an assault rifle when it's really all about magazine capacity. Let a few of us get away while you reload should be the point.
I've never seen 20 round mags for the AK. There are 10 round mags for states and countries with 10 round limits, but I've never seen 20. I'm sure they exist, someone has made just about anything you can imagine, but they are definitely not standard
@@filmandfirearms they are standard. Ive neve seen 10 round mags for aks. 10 round mags dont exist around here. You must live in a commie state like california or something if all you have is 10 round because califorrnia is gay like that.
Regardless of the type of firearm; someone has to (load bullets into a magazine,) chamber a round, disengage the safety, aim it at a person, and pull the trigger. It’s not an assault rifle, it’s an assault person.
Lots of good older short videos combined into one long video. As others have pointed out, they do a good job at minimizing the factual errors about firearms that other channels often don't verify.
Very accurate video. Most people don't know most of this. The way I have always explained it is by definition, "An assault rifle is a select fire rifle that uses an intermediate-rifle cartridge and a detachable magazine." No one can walk into a gun shop and buy an assault rifle as you would normally purchase a firearm. What you can buy is a semi-auto sporting rifle that is based on the same cosmetic and ergonomic design. The difference is that select fire allows a weapon user to select between different modes of fire which includes a mode to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger. Semi-auto is like any gun that has been available since the dawn of firearms, one pull, one shot. To obtain an actual assault rifle is very hard and expensive to do and is only done by a very small number of enthusiasts who are willing to apply to the government for the ability to do so. Those opposed to the 2nd amendment often claim these civilian models are assault rifles, but they are not. During the 1990s, the government coined the term "Assault Weapon" that was confusing in order to attempt to ban certain arbitrary civilian sporting firearms which turned out to be a nightmare to enforce as it was easy to get around the clumsily written law. The law had a sunset clause, and congress had no interest in renewing it and so the term Assault Weapon doesn't hold any significance today while Assault Rifle still stands as its original definition which does not include sporting weapons commonly available to citizens. Any person who refers to the bulk of these firearms as assault rifles or assault weapons are either misinformed or attempting to misinform the public.
Those green tipped 556 rounds do not create a cavity. They just sail straight through meat without breaking up. The damage caused by cavitation from a FMJ or hollow point round is much more significant.
green tips like most 556/223 rounds m855 green tip is designed to tumble,yaw, and disintegrate as it hits a soft target while the soft steel penetrator might sail through the lead body will not.
Simon, i appreciate your fairness of this video. As an american, i thought i was going to listen to a european talk out of his ass using mainstream propaganda as his arsenal the entire time. This was certainly not the case though, and i appreciate you not doing so. As an american, i know we all like to pretend that the 2nd ammendment has one reason, home defense and personal protection. However, this is false. The founding fathers intended this to be a part of the non negotiable bill of rights for a few reasons. One is personal and home defense, sure. But they thought ahead. They had just fought a revolutionary war against a much higher power, using only hunting rifles and men that had no military training, but rather were fighting for their own freedom. So, the founders left it in as well as to deter other countries from invading the united states. Another foreshadowed reason, and ill explain it in relation to ww2, is to deter the united states government from infringing unfair laws, taxes, or seizure of property on its citizens. If the jews had all been armed during the horrendous acts the germans performed upon them during world war two, there wouldve at the very least have been a shit ton more dead germans and far less dead jews than history ended up being. We know this because we have the example of the united states civil war. One side treated a group of people as if they were subhuman, undeserving of rights or property, acting attrociously towards them. The side that one was the side fighting with and on the behalf of those people, the african american slaves and abolishionist whites. So no, america should not give up their guns no matter their function, cartridge, attachments, or intent, because the 2nd ammendment has always intended for the citizenship of the states to be able to be the primary threat to any opposing force, including its own government. The gun violence issues we face today can be directly linked to mental health issues and resource hoarding. If you look at school shootings, an overwhelming amount of the children and young adults who commit these crimes are clinically disgnosed with one or multiple types of mental illnesses, and are more often than not, not given proper treatment resources and care. The inner city urban gun crimes are often crimes involving theft or armed robbery, directly linked to how inner cities have less resources on average than suburban areas per capita. Theres enough good jobs in suburbs to fit the need, but theres not enough good jobs in cities to provide for people and their families. The other problem is a prideful culture. People would rather shoot someone for their car, or shoot someone over petty street beef, than admit that they could do better or that they are wrong. This is also a problem with most rap songs and hip hop pushing gang, drug, drinking, and baby mama culture. Everyone wants to blame the tools used for the problem, but its really like 10-20 different problems all being improperly diagnosed or fixed. America has had the majority of the worlds guns throughout its entire history, yet its only become a problem in the lsst 30 or 40 years, thats not a coincidence.
Whenever any .gov agency puts out a solicitation for weapons broadly in the class of the AR-15, (usually with full auto or burst requirement), it's called a "Personal Defense Weapon". Wow, that sounds like what I would use it for.
Oh man, here we go. AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle which fires 1 round per trigger pull. AR stands for Armalite Rifle, not assault rifle. (As fully explained in this video)
@@AnotherPointOfView944 and, I jumped the gun, forgive the pun! Simon coming in strong with unbiased facts. A wonderful explanation of history, engineering, and science.
@@jtec99 Well done on admitting your mistake of jumping the gun on the video. Most American gun nutters are a bit to dumb to do that. Truly you are one of the intelligent few
One of the best discussions on assault rifle history and characteristics I've heard. Very well done. The last bit about the cosmetic nature of the term "assault weapon" is particularly good, if brief.
If AR stands for Armalite rifle, what about the AR-24 pistol or the AR-17 shotgun? I believe it just stands for Armalite. It is a classic naming convention, Horton-Ho, Messerschmitt-Me, Heinkel-He, Sukhoi-Su, Mikoyan Gurevich-Mig, etc.
The Va Tech shooter killed 32 with a pistol. Or look at the Texas Tower shooter. Or the Navy Yard shooter using a shotgun. Another aspect is tactics and training. Whether Uvalde or Parkland, there are useful questions about tactics, training, and building design.
It's anything the ruling class doesn't want the commoners to have, which is anything the commoners can use to defend themselves from the ruling class. And remarkably, many of the commoners support these measures.
Hahahhahaha. No The US has more guns per capita than any other country and is a complete oligarchy. All those guns sure aren't doing anything about the the lazy rich royalty ruling over us.
Your legal firearms against the US governments' fully auto M16s, stealth fighters, nuclear bombs, tanks, etc. Imagine fancying your chances 😅 Look at the number of perps who get killed by cops with handguns. Their gun didn't protect them from their paranoia about the ruling class. And you think you can take on the government? 😆 It is democracy and respect for it that keeps you safe from the ruling class. Though with 50% of people in the US supporting an insurrectionist, that's in its last days now.
Because of propaganda produced by the ruling class. My favorite example is their recent attempts to criminalize and scare the population over the affair of home made firearms to convince the people to give up their freedom to build firearms in their own homes after over two centuries.
Before watching, as of 2019, there were only 500 deaths in the entirety of the US from rifles of ANY kind, for that year. That’s even counting self defense cases. Edit: the only difference between an M16/M4 and an AR-15 is removal and changing of the fire control group. You can easily (but illegally) change it out for an M16 FCG. I would like to thank the writers of this script, and Simon for presenting it in a factual, unbiased manner.
@@AnotherPointOfView944 that's negligible in a nation of 330 million people, think of the most bizarre and unlikely cause of death your mind can even fathom, and it's probably more than 500 annually.
Fun fact about the M-14: Italy did it first, and cheaper. Because, you see, Beretta had the last working Garand assembly line and used that for their BM-59, doing it cheaper by already having the assembly line and, somehow, faster. And the gun worked so well that most M-14 you see in fiction are actually BM-59.
😂🤣😹 *Ladies and gentlemen, the opinion of the unmarried marriage counselor & childless child expert! So speaks someone who obviously never had to hump any of that gear!*
Its an enabler. If you carry a toothpick you can injure someone a lot up close. Carry a AR15 you can discretely injure someone at a distance. Americans dont know the difference.
No it was actually because assault rifles were designed with ergonomics and form to be fired while mobile or "assaulting" a positon, this is contrasted to what at the time was the more common main battle rifles of the military that were designed to be fired from a stable positon. That's why the military named this class of weapon assault rifle when they were created.
@@dannyslag Not really, most any firearm being fired while not in a stable position is pretty darn inaccurate and pretty darn a waste of good ammunition... If one is moving while firing maybe a shotgun would be better, or maybe a low power handheld fully auto machine gun. The M16 is designed to be fired from a stable position... If on the move assaulting, maybe one wants to fix a bayonet... At least that is what I learned in the USMC...
That's not true. It is a military classification just like "general purpose machine gun" and "squad automatic weapon". It is defining a weapons role in military doctrine and does in fact have a definition of a box magazine fed, select fire rifle, chambered for an intermediate cartridge. Look, I'm very pro-gun I own a whole safe of ARs. Trying to pretend a definition doesn't exist that anyone who ever served in a modern military knows exists isn't the path to a logical argument.
I have to admit I didn't expect this to be as fair and a perfect explanation of what things are classified as and why etc! I'm impressed! Cheers from Georgia USA ☮️🤘
The section of Assault Rifles was one of the best examples of the history and definition of assault rifle. Also the explanation of the difference of a M-16 and the AR-15. Thank you. I will be using this to explain these differences to people who don’t understand the definitions.
@edfost5734 Guns are accessible in most of Europe, and in some cases they can get things that are illegal in the US. The difference being its not a right to own firearms in any part of Europe its a privilege
It is humorous that the current debate the pro gun control side in the usa wants to say the AR platform is a military weapon when the case they like to cite is US v Miller (the first case to make it to SCOTUS dealing with gun control), though filled with major issues, said the sawed off shotgun could be regulated since it WASN'T a military weapon.
I've watched videos where a guy in California had an .22 AR rifle and a M1 Grand and was asking liberals which gun should be banned and which they thought was safer 😂😂 everyone picked the AR for being banned and the M1 as being a "safer" even tho the M1 has killed way more than an AR 😂😂
17:30 I have 30 years experience in gunsmithing and I'll tell you, I always carry a Mini-14 before a AR15, like you said it's the same round and capability, just a wooden stock. I just like it better, my grouping is better too.
Too many of you aren’t too bright. AR15’s and other military style weapons are SUPPOSED to be dangerous. Those who argue a weapon isn’t dangerous simultaneously argue (for our adversaries) that in order for us to posses the weapon, it must not be dangerous. Please please stop arguing this point! The weapons protected by the 2nd amendment are SUPPOSED to be weapons of WAR. We already posses crippled arms because our side makes dumb arguments like “hunting rifles are more powerful” or “AR15s just look scary”….like it’s some bid to be permitted to continue to own them. The bottom line is that our military style weapons are not scary enough. nor powerful enough until they equal what the professional soldier they were designed to deter is issued.
This really can't be said enough. Although it's also going to come down to the crowd you're with too. I'm from Washington state, and arguing that we should have weapons of war would turn most of the people I know up there into the Brady Campaign Bunch - even moderates on the issue, which are the target crowd. Out in my current southern state, I might use that argument to change a few people's minds on the unconstitutionality of the machine gun ban... if there's anyone left out here who doesn't think it's unconstitutional already.
I just came for the first 18 minutes expecting at least some bad propaganda here and there… but no. That was pretty factual and accurate without getting into the weeds. Bravo to you, sir!😊
This entire gun debate is a sham to fear monger people into submission. Can anybody explain why a gun is more dangerous than the 20 pounds of smokeless gunpowder you can legally own for muzzle loaders.
As an American Marine i can definitely say that black/tan plastic is the heat seaking option. Real talk though. Military style arms is how and why we aren't British and had the abilitie to overthrow a tyrannical government of the king of England
LMAO you think that is how we overthrew England. First off, genius, the weapons in the 1770's was single shot SMOOTHBORE muskets. The war wasn't won with those in the hands of militia. IT was won with trained regular soldiers who also had artillery. It was also with a ton of help from the FRENCH NAVY.
@timothyhouse1622 while that was important, if there wasn't any of these muskets there would be no armed civilians able to stand against the British in Lexington and Concord, thus never starting the war in the way ours kicked off
@@isaackolman2861 you do realize both those battles were LOSSES, right? And the militia were wanting to raid British armories for REAL guns. Let us know how that AR15 fairs against modern drones, artillery and tanks.
@timothyhouse1622 that would be a pretty good question to ask the viet cong, the taliban, and the Ukrainians currently fighting a much larger country. AR-15s and AK-47s work pretty well for fighting a guerilla war. Also, yes those battles were losses, but how many battles did Russia lose before pushing the germans all the way to Berlin?
@@timothyhouse1622you started out strong but then I watched in horror as you descended into gross ignorance. You could listen to The Bill Cosby routine about the war of independence and get a better education on the subject! I take it that somehow in your long years of study you completely missed the minutemen, and that the Continental Army was a small and pathetic thing reinforced with local militias wherever engagements took place. It wasn't one. It wasn't the other. It was some of everything, but then we'd have to get into skirmishers, cavalry, artillery...
I purchased 35 years ago a German Mauser 1898 rifle & bayonet. It is a bolt action beautiful made weapon. Germany has made some remarkable pistols and rifles for many decades. I love the feel of this rifle in your hands, firing it is a pure joy & I find myself at times going into my game/poker room just to look at the beautiful craftsmanship that went into making this rifle. Shalom
@15:57 This isnt true. Ar15s aren't by definition semi autos. All M16s and M4s are AR15s with select fire capabilities (obviously not all ar 15s are m16s or m4). Probably the definition for an ar15 is any weapon that uses the pattern for such device and ahears to its specifications for its reciever.
By patent, the AR15 as designed by Eugene Stoner was semi-automatic. It was after the military adopted it and redesignated it as the M16 that it gained select fire functionality. So, according to the patent, the AR-15 is, by definition, semi auto.
@@kruger1932 The AR-15 was adapted from the select fire AR-10 which used the same patented gas impingement system. All the Armalite AR-15s were select fire from the beginning. The civilian semi-auto only Colt AR-15 Sporter was produced after the adoption of the M16. After that the AR-15 name became associated with the civilian version, and the M16 with the full auto version.
Let’s not be pedantic. The “AR15” as commonly used is indeed by definition SEMI auto since overwhelmingly it refers to civilian semi-auto rifles. Simon is correct in all but the narrowest, most pedantic sense, and since he obviously went to great pains to get this video correct on the facts, we firearms ethusiasts should be applauding the accuracy and great detail in the video instead of ankle biting at pedantic details.
I think you mean a debate involving liberals - who in America are right of center, but don’t like guns - vs. conservatives, right-wingers and leftists, who all like guns.
How is it that this man from across the world is more knowledgeable, and has more information about firearms than the walking potatoes in the US government. Thank you for your service to the world Simon
30:15 I used this in airsoft to give the round projectiles a flatter trajectory, by making the projectile rotate as if a wheel rolling down the road it intitially rises as it leaves the barrel, but as it slows there is a quite long range where the ball literally flies through the air without dropping, and as the ground speed slows, it slowly loses lift.
In 1654 the Danish Royal Guard used repeating flintlock rifles capable of firing 30 shots before reloading to defeat Swedish troops in Copenhagen. Don't ever let somebody tell you that such weapons did not exist until recently. Go to Forgotten Weapons for a video on this
This is a surprisingly balanced video and points out exactly why every civilian should own one. It also helps describe why they would be ideal for home defense, especially for someone who is not necessarily military fit such as an elderly or disabled person or someone's small in stature.
As a Californian, idk how putting a "fin" or a 90 degree grip makes an AK or AR15 any less "deadly" than when it has a normal pistol grip. Gonna get my first gun soon btw, a CZ75.
*PHENOMENAL.* High quality, thorough research that prioritizes logic and intellect over the feelings of emotions. These things were around for decades before the 90’s. Before the 90’s, kids had their firearms in school for woodshop. School owned rifles in their closets for shooting clubs. Rifles were in kids trucks parked outside. Hell, some shotguns were next to fishing rods in their own lockers! Seriously, you can find woodshop shotguns in gun shows to this day! During the Violent Crime Enforcement Act policies rolled out in 1993 and 1994 to fight drug and gang crime, firearms because prohibited at schools along with other things like the Assault Weapons Ban (all within the packet of laws under the Violet Crime Control Act.) While yes firearm homicide plummeted (homicide rate nearly HALVED)… you can thank the additional 100,000 police officers and their $10,000,000,000 of funding for that rather than guns not being in schools and assault weapons prohibited from purchase, given that the affected rifles were the LEAST reduced crime and school homicides began to RISE since they’ve been prohibited on schools (because OBVIOUSLY. Bad guys LOVE laws that good guys have to follow. It lets bad guys get unlimited access to as many kills as they want because there’s rules good guys follow that don’t allow them to defend.) It’s important to have intelligent conversations in these topics and remove emotional decision making that costs people their lives by regulating self defense with more rules bad guys happily don’t follow
I really do appreciate the breakdown of what an AR-15 actually is. We need more demystification around firearms so people can understand what these terms mean realistically. As an 18-year-old in California, you can get a hunting license and purchase a hunting rifle that can shoot distances over 1000 yards and that has a much larger bullet size than the commonly critiqued .223/5.56 Ar-15 round. But we all need to understand that the 2nd amendment was not codified in law for hunting purposes but was done so to allow decent people to preserve their lives in the event that their lives are threatened, either by a citizen adversary or an adversarial, tyrannical government/invading force. Firearms, in places where bad people have the ability to acquire guns outside the bounds of the law, are simply life insurance policies that allow you to have at least a fighting chance to survive in an instance that might very well be your last.
Kentucky Ballistics, Administrative Results, Brandon Herrera, and Forgotten Weapons are all great RUclips channels for anyone interested in more on the various weapons mentioned.
Edit: Garand Thumb, hickok45, and Paul Harrell also deserve to be mentioned here as noted below
Someone needed to say this
Lots of people need to see more about weapons
Kentucky Ballistics (KB) almost always focuses on large-bore rifles. However, has a sub-series on his channel commonly called "how lethal is it" which often features the testing of less than lethal weapons.
Administrative Results is more broad, and I think there are many video overlaps.
Forgotten Weapons (FW) is much more history of weapons/historical weapons focus, and does not answer or pose any questions. FW is a great source for research, but not so much for follow-up from this video.
Brandon Herrera is... Deeply problematic. Yes, Brandon Herrera has good videos around gunsmithing like his AK-50 project (A 50 BMG rifle built around AK family architecture).Yes, his "cursed weapons" series are both interesting and funny. However, the politics and hot takes that often accompany his videos are either a dog whistle, an echo chamber, or a sudden turn depending on your life perspective.
Don’t forget Garand Thumb
@@jsk3428this
I am as pro-gun as you can possibly get, and I have written papers on guns and "gun violence". You are infinitely more accurate than mainstream media (MSM) on the topic of guns. Thank you. I can only pray that the MSM becomes as honest and as good as you.
Don't get your hope up about the MSM taking any rational position on firearms.
IKR I have a much deeper respect for this channel.
This video and the one he did on trump are surprising non bias information
He does not know a thing about the German mgs they were easy to move and all worked as a light bipod mounted mg until set up on a trippod!
@@philipbriney4430Way too powerful cartridge full sending lead at mach fuck (has there ever been a faster firing MG?) weighing in at a-lot with overall way-too-much length. Yeah I wouldn't wannna wave that absolute unit around
That was the most nuanced dive into "assault weapons" I've seen from a non-gun channel.
Kudos to the writers.
Assault weapons are not assault rifles. Assault rifle is a very specific machine with a very specific list of parts and features. Assault weapon is a made up legal term that is nebulous and vague in scope so that it can be applied to anything you please
@@NINacide That's why I put it in quotes.
@@NINacide not really, automatic or semi automatic, cock your gun if you want to fire
@@NINacide There is nothing specific about the "definition" of assault rifle. It's a purely political term that means whatever the people using it want it to mean.
@@AJHart-eg1ys You're thinking of 'assault weapon.' Assault Rifle does have a specific definition as discussed in this video. 'Assault weapon' just means whatever the person saying the words wants to ban.
Wasn't expecting a reasonable video about "scary black rifles" from a Brit today, but here we are. Cheerio, Simon. Here's to hoping your homeland gets their whole INGSOC situation figured out soon.
You tanks are so fecking ignorant, you really are. Here I am in the UK with two dozen firearms, three of which are AR platform. I own more than the average Yank and I know plenty of British folks who own firearms too.
I’ve been saving this comment for a few years so I’m gonna choose my words very carefully. I think Simon was honestly surprised at the level of military interest in the RUclips community. I don’t think (early videos) he and his team thought they would do as well as they did, hence they focused after (rightly so), on similar content. Having said that, I “feel” like Simon has actually become truly interested in this topic (as opposed to just narrating on it). My passion is firearm education, I find joy in just teaching about guns, getting people interested in guns, how they work, why , the history. Ive seen Simon’s team get educated, the tone changes, the script is more fair, balanced, ACCURATE (lord thank you), the team has really brought it to the next level of education. Thank you, with sincere gratitude
I think you’re a psychopath, who is ok with children being shot in schools and have a weird agenda.
Willing to discuss how you aren’t.
@@breachfirearms5753 I agree that this channel has become particularly good about accuracy and authentic info about weaponry. However, I believe the defining factor is the addition of Gilles Messier to the writing staff. Seriously, check out his channel "Our Own Devices" which focuses almost exclusively on military and paramilitary equipment (including weapons of all types). That man is a proper firearms engineer, like myself. The sort of folks who don't necessarily shoot as often as we should but obsessively focus on the mechanical aspect of firearms development. Our collections tend to include unique mechanisms like the Cz53, Chiappa Rhino, Browning Auto 5 (or clones), Bullpups (especially the Ps90), etc... Basically, folks like him and I are particularly interested in the design and function, gunsmithing for short, similar to a mechanic or blacksmith, as opposed to outright implementation like a soldier, racecar driver, or knight.
Very well put and the same sentiment is found.
Hunting rifles are far more powerful than the average ar15
Yeah man, I was looking at a .300 win-mag and *that* isn't even the most powerful round around. It'll literally disintegrate small game.
@@strikezrow yeah most hunting rifles are literally just sniper rifles.
@@spider_pig7588 that's the litigious slippery slope too. It's why you never give the authorities power to change definitions
“Powerful” is important when hunting something big like a buck.
For a puny little human they are overkill.
Irrelevant as hunting has nothing to do with 2A. But yeah, AR15's are chambered in varmint rounds and intermediate rounds that barely best magnum revolver energies. The average "hunting rifle" round like a .30-06 or 7mm-08 are far more powerful, and those are pretty moderate small arms compared to some of the big .338 Norma Mag's, big bore stopping rifles, etc
Simon, again, Texas gun guy here.
Outstanding video about the AR. It's nice to see so.eone ACTUALLY give the facts and the history, along with definitions and not take a side either way.
Thanks for that sir, we'll done.
@@collincutler4992 yea I was impressed too, usually when you see a video like this online it's just a lecture about how we should surrender our rights so the boot can rest more comfortably on our necks. Well done on Simon.
Nevada gun guy here, agreed. This is a very refreshing video to watch, with no silliness or bias. Actual facts and history, actually teaching. Rare W RUclipsr.
@@collincutler4992 lol i was concerned when i saw the title and know the UK accent 🤣. My bad Simon!
Saying you are a "gun guy" has to be the most small brain energy thing you can say.
@@timothyhouse1622 ok I'm an assault weapon guy
Based on previous videos Simon and the writters actually give a pretty fact based and fair review of gun culture.
Gilles Messier is an extreme gun enthusiast if you go check out his Our Own Devices channel. :-) He writes all our gun based content here, as well as our second most prolific author overall outside of me. But I started TIFO so the fact that he is rapidly catching me up... He's great and an amazing research and writer. :-) Also a genuine genius. :-) If you like his stuff here, for real go check him out on Our Own Devices. Super good channel. -Daven
@@TodayIFoundOut thanks for the tip. I'll definitely check it out. Keep up the great work.
@@TodayIFoundOutGod tier my friend. I really respect you so much after watching. My only point of contention was your take on the Israeli-Palestine war and it wasn’t to do with you being biased. It was more so the info you learned from probably trusted sources that was biased towards defending the actions of the Nazi, and then genocidal nationalist, Muslims which became the main culture of the modern day “Palestinian”. Their culture is one of abuse and manipulation, and a large debatable percentage of Palestinians are directly settlers/immigrants who moved to Jewish created communities. There was only 1-2 places that could be argued to be a town/community in the lands of Palestine extending into what is now Jordan and Egypt (the original full lands). The history clearly shows that Jewish people always bought their land and developed open communities, and that the “Palestinians” were either fine with Jewish majoirty or leadership, or they were Muslim Nationalists or influenced by the genocidal Muslims. In fact despite the leader of what became the Palestinian people after the war was actually a Nazi general before the war with Israel and tried to get Hitler to help him genocide the Jews. During the Balfour declaration discussions the British were clearly going to give a one state to the “Arabs/Muslim nationalists” aka the people that Palestinians claim to be their own ancestors or “people”. But the Arabs openly stated that they were going to forcefully remove and kill the Jewish people in Palestine. That’s why the British handed it to the UN and the only reason a two state solution happened. Then the British and UN abandoned the Jewish people… but the British didn’t want to fight any wars or conflicts for the Jews, but it was right after WWII and the British absolutely could not give a complete state to the Muslims who openly intended to genocide the Jews, many of which were refugees. You can read the documents and there’s a video that reads their discussions for you. The Arabs were open and honest about this the whole process and said these things up until recent times. Because modern liberals for some reason project their own morality and can’t see the truth, these important facts are just left out. But those facts are key to the discussion even if you are anti Israeli. But even stating basic facts will get you called racist or crazy despite the fact that this is open and clear history which the Palestinians openly admitted to. So even if the numbers are closer to the Palestinians having heritage before the Jews came in 1880, there were no communities nevertheless identities until the Jews came (with 1-2 exceptions that were isolated), and the modern day Palestinians are more Nazi/Muslim Nationalist influence and culture than they are the original people that lived there. We also forgot how the Muslims did openly genocide Jews across the middle East and we can assume they would have done the same to Israel and they also openly stated their intent to do so during all of the conflicts.
Also the whole “violence escalated” is such a lie. The “Palestinians” kept escalating racism and violence and their leaders encouraged and funded it in the goal of Muslim nationalism. The Jewish people didn’t come close to equal responses and the main people and government openly worked hard to stop violence and escalation by random civilians. So we have systemic funding of terrorism by the Palestinians and we have systemic influence to avoid conflict and act morally by the Jewish people. Violence by the Jews was independent of what the Muslim Nationslists (aka ancestors of modern Palestinians) were doing. These are clearly recorded in history by the writings and documents from these two groups. Whether they both even objectively did the same in harm or whatever else you think, what makes the largest difference is the open genocidal intent of the Palestinians as a people, and the deescalation of conflict by the Jewish people as a group. We have to hold some responsibility based upon what the leadership and govt of a group of people are trying to do and their intentions. The difference here is clear, especially since the Palestinians clearly committed and escalated conflict over and over before any perceived “response” happened by Jewish people. I hope you get a chance to research and explore this, Netanyahu has a great historically accurate book and actually multiple books that don’t have many/any refutations. You can research to see what was refuted or criticized as not historically accurate too, and his books were obviously targeted by many people trying to disprove the history in them. That’s some of the stuff I’ve learned about the history, I may be wrong about some of it and please feel free to respond with what you know or find. If you could make a new episode I’d love that so much, and you can at least focus on the Jordan Peterson interviewing Netanyahu video on RUclips. He summarized what was in his book which has few if anything that has been disproven when it comes to history. Obviously search more but that’s a great place to start with the stuff that is left out completely from modern knowledge.
@@TodayIFoundOutI did not detect any references to "gun culture" WETF that is. You just got the history right.
@@TodayIFoundOutBTW, I don't mean to disparage the assault rifle portion of the video. While I think I could write most of the script from memory, I always learn something. The AK - stamped to machined to stamped - was something I didn't know.
What defines an assault rifle is:
• It’s black
• it has scary things that stick out of it
• It has a scary name like “BLT 57“
• it has collapsing parts, so it can be concealed in a shirt or pants pocket
• It has “magazines” that hold millions of those bullet things
Not magazines, they are CLIPS 😂😂😂
Especially the dreaded “Banana Clip”.
Don't forget "the thing in back that goes up"
And they literally disintegrate everything that even comes near them! Don't even look at it, you'll be overcome with murderous intent!
The sound alone is deafening, and bullet hits will vaporize limbs.
Thank you for pointing out AR stands for armalite. Honestly I'm glad Simon is doing gun content and I'm here for it!
Amazing how often this is misfiled. Good job
In 1998, I was a Midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy. One day, Mikhail Kalashnikov visited and had lunch with us. While I didn't personally meet him, we gave him a GIGANTIC standing ovation when the Brigade Commander announced our special guest.
That's really neat.
Selective fire, intermediate powered cartridge, detachable box magazine.
BTW, the 2nd Amendment is not about sport.
A fellow fuddbuster?
"I actively support the military of a government I'm stockpiling arms against." - Schrodinger's Patriot
@@anneahlert2997 checks and balances.
The class of weapon you're describing there was originally designated machine carbine (Maschinenkarabiner)
@@TheSundayShooter And a musket was a weapon of war. Doesnt matter.
I'm surprised RUclips let you publish a mostly-accurate and factual report about firearms, and that they let you get away with showing standard capacity magazines.
Same.
@MR-MR-ud5oo im surprised the big brain Simon was on board with spreading information.
@@gibbyrockerhunter Also true.
@@GBGuns I did notice an airsoft-orange magazine in there, so I wonder if that was photographed in California.
@@trevorodell5564 Probably just stock images. I'm happy Simon was able to make this video, but once again it shows how unevenly RUclips applies its policies.
Absolutely awesome to have an unbiased person deliver outstanding facts about the misconception of "Assault weapons"
Here is the part that often gets overlooked, especially by people from other countries. The 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with sport or hunting. It's who purpose is to put military power in the hands of civilians in case the government tries to go full Putin. The fact that an AR-15 has military use fits right in with the intent of the 2nd.
Plus, as others have no doubt said here, the things that make it valuable in a military sense have nothing to do with the power of it's round. The AR-15 fires a very light round when compared to most deer hunting calibers. An AR-15 was designed to be light and easily portable, for a soldier that might have to carry the damned thing 50 miles on foot. The intermediate round gives it a lot of carried ammunition without weighing a lot either. In short, it's not the power of the AR-15 that makes it a military weapon, it is the light weight and portability that makes Armies love it.
Full Putin? Lol, they already went full Biden
@@hotcakesism yeah we're working on that. The Democrat party is probably done forever.
they also forget: It's the bill of rights, not the bill of needs. "No one needs a [insert spec here]" is a moot argument.
The AR -15 was never fielded by the military… it is not a military weapon…the AR15 is strictly a civilian semi automatic variant and visibly identical to the military variant (M16/M4) but without the giggle switch and third pin hole giving full auto or 3 round burst capability.(depending on the fire control parts installed
@@ParasitikOne That is fairly common knowledge. However, the AR-15 is the gun that is on the front page of these discussions. Plus, a civilian AR-15 would make a fine military rifle. Full auto is not used much except in close ranged fights or if crap has gone really south.
It’s a weapon that looks scawy.
A lot scarier than the books ReTHUGlicans want to ban.
English?
SKS with a black stock? AK47 ASSAULT RIFLE
@@CCPJerBear >> With half the functionality of military versions…so their not really assault rifles at all.
Look at the idiot who doesn't understand engineering 101 that form equals function.
Well after the end of the cold war, there was an event where Eugene Stoner and Kalashnakova met, shook hands, and shot guns. The Russian gun designer was shocked at the fact that American made millions off of his design, and the American was shocked that the Russian was just given a handshake and a medal, with no money paid for the AK design.
That's Communism for you, everybody gets the same payment.
Tbh a better guest would have been Jim Sullivan, everyone who actually knows the AR platform knows that Stoner had an ego and Sullivan was the real MVP of the design
Gotta love communism. No matter what greatness you achieve you won't see a dime unless you're in the party. If you're in the party you're more equal than the rest regardless of you being a useless waste of organic matter
Kalashnikov. Kalashnikova is the feminine version of the name. The only time that would be accurate would be if you were speaking about his wife or daughter
Kalashnakova never designed AK, just used the name, Schmeisser did he design. I am shocked that folks believe in the myth that illiterate guy can write New York best seller.
As a "gun nut" with a humble but slightly larger than average rifle collection all I have to say is that if I had to choose between an M1 Garand and an AR15 to get shot at with I would pick neither, but the AR15 comes in second. Especially at any range of 100 yards or more. People don't tend to understand the power behind a "full power" rifle round and the kind of damage it can do.
But "muh tumble bullet"
@@jffry890yeah it only tumbles out to 200 yards if it's shot from a 20" barrel, people seem to forget that.
@@bdkj3e I meant less about keyholing and more about how fudds talk up the 5.56's lethality by justifying it's horrible ballistics by saying the tumbling makes it more deadly.
Full power is indeed more powerful, but in skilled hands, an assault rifle is a lot more dangerous. That being said, your average deranged gunman is hardly a skilled operator.
Thank you Simon and team. Regardless of where you personally stand, or your nation's particular laws and culture, you presented a facts-first overview of the Assault Rifle/Weapon history and the US's modern internal debate. If anyone on your team were personally against such topics, I applaud their journalistic integrity to deliver the facts as they are, without cherry-picking or bias. If any on your team are arms enthusiasts, the lack of bias or attempts to push agenda speaks to your journalistic integrity and commitment. This is what SHOULD HAPPEN and so very much doesn't from news, education, or true informational outlets. While I am biased, and am definitely far on one side of my nation's internal debate, having a source that is "clean" to be used to get anyone 'up-to-speed' on the actual facts is a true modern treasure among the internet's normal desert.
Long time viewer, subsciber, and supporter, thank you. (Oh, and this is a 2fer for me... I'm also using this as examples on what unbiased fact-based reporting should look like.)
U could show this to the anti gunners I don't think most would care because they would rather carry on than admit they were wrong it's a shame but it is what it is
Box magazine fed, select fire, intermediate power cartridge.
This is the correct answer. If it doesn't have a giggle switch, it's a sporting rifle.
Friggin bingo
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote!" -Ben Franklin
@@AliceBowie "sporting rifle" is a joke, the second ammendment protects military armaments and thus all citizens should be able to purchase any rifle, suppressor, or other such arms as they wish
@@jakegrube9477
And nukes apparently
I was taught when I studied firearms history, in my first year of my gunsmithing course, an assault rifle is capable of fully automatic fire, it has to use a larger than pistol calibur, if it uses a pistol calibur, then its an smg, It can not ever be an assault rifle if it is only capable of semi-automatic fire..
Sub machine guns and pistol caliber carbines aren't the same thing though
What he said. This description is spot on. From now on we need to start correcting anyone that calls semi autos assault rifles.
@MrCashewkitty they are grouped together for simplicity, along with machine pistols, the same thing can have different classifications by different countries, the MP40 was a Machine Pistol by German standards, but an SMG by British standards, the Sten was classed as a pistol calibur carbine by the british, but as an SMG by pretty much everyone else. . . There is a whole varience of classifications, some due to if it has a stock or not. . . . Its much easier just to have the catagories of .
Rifle, Semi automatic or bolt action.
SMG, Pistol calibur, fully automatic capable.
Assault Rifle, small to intermediate rifle calibur, fullly automatic capable.
Automatic Rifle/Battle rifle, full rifle calibur, fully automatic capable, still single man operatable.
Then your into your LMGs, MGs and other team operated weapons.
If it hets more complicated than that, your starting to risk certain political parties being able to try a group large armounts of weapons under blanket bans and restrictions.
@@MrCashewkittySMGs go brrrrrr and PCCs don't. And SMGs are heavily restricted as they are machineguns while PCCs are semi auto, therefore fine. Except if a PCC is an open bolt gun, in which case even tho it's semi auto it's counted as a machinegun because laws make perfect sense as always
@@MrCashewkittymachine pistols aren't the same thing either, but all three are vaguely similar
I’m only 18 minutes into the video and I have to say bravo! Well done! You give the proper definition of an assault rifle and even point out the difference in an AK47 and AKM! I’m impressed!
Can you believe theres still 2 hours left?!?!?
Assault rifle means full automatic fire. AR-15's that civilians use are NOT full automatic and can only fire one shot per trigger pull. Civilian AR's and AK-47's are NOT assault rifles!!
The law passed in the 90's used the phrase "assault weapon" specifically so they could dodge the Military classification of an "assault rifle" and just make up whatever they wanted.
He said that. He even said the AR in AR 15 stands for armalite rif le
Maaaaowzer. Watch the forgotten weapons channel for much much more detail. CnArsenal is also fantastic for this, CnA cover every small arm of ww1 and now moving to ww2. Both are deeply technical in detail. This video is a great overview and feels pretty accurate. Beard’s looking on point Simon!
Thank you for accurately explaining the truth about “assault rifles.” As a gun owner, it is very annoying to hear non-gun owners on TV discussing things they don’t understand at all.
My assault pencils are responsible for my grammatical errors
Mechanical pencils are prone to jamming. You don't want to rely on them if SHTF during an exam. Or at least have a backup piece.
That’s just propaganda from big pencil. Mechanical pencils are the future fud. 😂 this is fun 😆
I'm here a little early to witness the brawl in the comments section.
Yeah, the gunhumpers are getting started early. And at length.
@@SafetySpooon The problem is what Simon covered at 17:05. We can debate all day about who should own firearms, what their purpose is, what the US 2nd Amendment means, and what capabilities should be available to civilians. Now is neither the time nor the place, but we could.
What isn't up for debate is this. For 10 years in the US a piece of plastic, which can be snapped on and off a barrel, was the difference between a legal gun and a felony. It's like declaring every car with a spoiler, including the Toyota Prius, a "tactical vehicle." Then throwing anyone who owns one in jail. Extending the analogy further, minivan with a spoiler would be "straight to jail."
It's absurd and detracts from real important discussions.
@@arthurmoore9488VERY well said Mr.Moore. I haven’t finished listening to Simon’s 3 hour! definition; I loath getting lectured about the evils of gun ownership from people whose country is burning to the ground around them. That includes any blue city denizen, American or otherwise.
Based on the comments, Simon has done a proper job of it. Really though, what’s not to understand about freedom, tyranny and what is required to sustain the former and destroy the latter.
@@arthurmoore9488 silly laws written by silly people with silly ideals
@@SafetySpooon thanks that's all I need to know to know this video isn't for me
I hope my state leaders watch this video so they can learn something!!
@@nin29nin Just be glad you aren't in Washington, our legislators literally made up terms and twisted definitions such as "assault weapon" to create a blanket ban on damn near everything and pass some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, even the SKS is listed under prohibited items
They already know the truth. They just pander to their base.
The head of the ATF can't even disassemble a Glock which is completely dumb if you are in charge of making laws about guns you should be educated in them so many politicians think an AR round makes a massive hole in people or the number of bullets in the magazine means thats how many it can shoot per trigger pull 😂😂 always a good laugh to look up "politicians completely clueless about guns"
Learning something would be completely antithetical to their goals. Ignorance allows unfettered tyranny and plausible denieability. I like your hope, though.
@@noonespecial9840 Look, I get it. It's easy to see people as wanting to control everything. But, do you really thing that woman who sawed the barrel off her husband's AR for a political ad really cares about firearms? She thought she was "destroying" it while publicly committing a felony. Pretty far from "unfettered tyranny" to me.
The ultimate irony is that Eugene Stoner and Mikhail Kalashnikov - the guys who created the most iconic weapons for the deadliest war that never happened and a hundred wars in the meantime - admired each others work, became very good friends, and kept a correspondence.
An objective factual examination on what an assault rifle is, pointing out that "assault weapon" is a nebulous term based only on cosmetics and then ending the segment with saying that the gun control debate is outside the scope of the channel. Bravo, Simon. My respect for you increased even more.
I literally have a St. Benitez T-shirt with his face on it. Dude's a menace to the 9th circuit.
A weapon is nothing without the will and skill of the operator. I am the true weapon. Everything else is an extension of my desire to accomplish what I set out to.
I hunt big and small game in America and I was deployed to Iraq during the surge as a turret gunner, I firmly believe that falling to the ground when shot is mostly psychological and a bit physical but it can easily be trained out. Getting in a gunfight is very stressful and creates a lot of adrenaline, a dump of adrenaline causes a loss in motor functions (fight flight or freeze) Getting shot in a gunfight and crumpling seems to mostly be a civilian thing. I know of several cases where a guy is shot and doesn't know it until after the gunfight and dies almost immediately after the adrenaline wears off enough so that we train to recognize if this is happening. If you aren't used to doing high stress things in a high adrenaline environment I think you probably will crumple down if you've been shot on top of all that is going on already. Most people in a civilian environment don't even realize they are being shot at until they get hit.
This was the most factual and correct video I have ever seen about assault rifles and their origins I have ever seen from a non-gun enthusiast channel. No cringing or shouting at my computer from me this time!
I think that Simon, and the writers, have a very obvious passion for guns. They simply don't make it their exclusive shtick
Originally 'AR' stood for ARmalite, not Armalite Rifle. The AR-9 and AR-17 are shotguns, the AR-24 is a 9mm pistol, and the AR-22 and 23 are training devices for Mk19 grenade launchers! But it became such a common misconception that Armalite (which is not the original company, which went bust in the '80's), now goes along with the designation of AR as Armalite Rifle.
People fall down due to FIBs. “Fuck I’ve been shot”
There is only 1 named assault rifle ever fielded by any nation. It was Germany's Stürmgewehr StG44. The Storm Rifle. The US Military HAS NEVER NAMED A CLASS OF WEAPONS AS ASSAULT.
Now let's go into Eugene Stoner as his contributions to modern weapons. While working as a small arms designer for the Armalite Corporation, itself a division of a major military aircraft company, Mr. Stoner designed an entire series of weapons with AR followed by a number. Some were pilot's survival rifles that broke down into a compact form and fired .22LR. He later designed the AR-10 chambered in .308 to meet a bid proposal to replace the M1 Carbine in 1953. That design lost out to the M-14. He later redesigned the AR-10, chambering a variant of the .221 Winchester varmint cartridge and removed the select fire capability. That gun is the AR-15, and the weapon was also passed over for the M-14. The .221 Winchester morphed into the .222 Winchester and ultimately with minor case changes becam the .223 Remington. All are considered target shooting and varmint hunting calibers. 1957 rolls around and an Air Force General is touring Armalite. The General spots an AR-15, Eugene asks if the General wants to shoot watermelons with it. The General has a blast, and asks for a few hundred of them to give to his Strategic Airlift Command security troops. Armalite calls up Colt to produce under license. 1963 rolls around, and an Army General is hanging out with the Air Force General. Army General drools over the fancy rifle and is told to contact Colt. Colt seds a batch of 250, the Army isn't happy with it being a semi-automatic gun and starts requesting changes. First change is change .223 Reminton to 5.56x57mm NATO. That creates feeding and headspacing issues, so the forward assist is added, and while Colt is at it, make it full-auto. Then the Army says: " We need to use surplus WW2 gunpowder in the 5.56 NATO round." That creates chamber pressure issues, cases welding to the chamber, case head separation, and more nasty surprises. Mr. Stoner designs a new, modular rifle in 1963, his Stoner 63 series of guns.
Yes, the US military actually has named a class of weapons as "assault rifles". They did so back in the 1970's in an official US Army document entitled: "US Army intelligence document FSTC-CW-07-03-70, November 1970"
In this document they define an assault rifle as:
"short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."
That is on page 67 of the document where it also talks about the AK-47 and AKM. Hell the header for that page is "SECTION III: ASSAULT RIFLES"
While you are right in the fact that no specific single weapon other than the StG44 has had the word assault in its name, to say that the US military has never called anything an "assault rifle(s)" isn't true.
@Evinthal84
That definition doesn't apply to any US or Allied made arms(NATO/UN) save for the Israeli Galil, which in itself takes design cues from the AK and AR pattern rifles and was chambered in .308
To military planners at the time, a full-powered rifle cartridge was seen as .30-06, 7.62x54R, or 8mm Mauser. The Remington .223/5.56mm is classed as a sub-caliber rifle round in military use, and for sporting use it is classified as a Varmint caliber rated to hunt animals dog-sized and smaller.
Even the new 6.5mm(.25 caliber) round being adopted by the Army is still considered a sub-caliber round. When used for hunting at the limit of it's effective range, it lacks the power to drop a big horn ram and is useless against deer.
I hope he uses the real definition…
Assault Rifle - A gun used in war and school shootings.
He's always seemed kinda neutral about the whole thing, at least in the few videos I've seen where the subject comes up
@@nonsuchfalse
@@nonsuchsomeone's never picked up a gun lmao
He was surprisingly even handed. Even pointed out that the AR is "Armalite" not "Assault Rifle"
I clicked on this with the FULL EXPECTATION that it was going to be the last Simone video I ever watched.... I was wrong.... Very impressed by this
I'm from Texas and have LOTS of guns...even have an AR in my trunk. People are so scared of it, yet I have 2 hip holstered revolvers that will put 6 holes jn the side of an engine block of a semi...but of course they don't have all that scary black plastic on it ;)
I live off-grid on 20 acres of remote mountain wilderness, 8 miles from the county jail and 3 miles from a "young men's prison" where inmates are younger than 21, but convicted of serious felonies. We also have lots of large predators; pumas, bears, lynx, bobcat, wolves, coyotes, and weirdos who are addicted to meth (the scariest predators here).
EVERYONE who lives here owns guns! Most of us do not own ARs, as we need something that can stop an angry bear or mountain lion with one shot, and the small caliber AR doesn't cut it. Funny thing, no one here poses for Facebook selfies holding our firearms. Those who keep guns for protection prefer not to advertise what firepower we happen to own. It's more of a "eff around and find out" kind of thing.
A delightful neighbor lived out here for more than 30 years, alone. She died a few years back of natural causes, at age 88. She lived successfully alone, on her own terms. Lilly is a legend around here! We all knew that one does not simply go up and knock on her door if they valued their lives. Years back, a teenage prison escapee came to her door and met her .357 magnum. She didn't shoot him, but she sure scared the beejeebers out of him!
I learned to shoot with an AR.
School kids are not engine blocks let a few of us escape while you're reload your revolvers.
America loves to overcomplicate what is and is not an assault rifle when it's really all about magazine capacity. Let a few of us get away while you reload should be the point.
@@brenthood2337 my guess is you couldn't hit a whale from 20 feet even if you had 100 rounds.
"Large/High capacity magazines" its a ridiculous term. You mean standard capacity? 30 rounds for an ar15 and 20 rounds for ak47 is standard capacity.
Standard just means "in common use" or regulation. So yes, 30 round AR and AK mags are standard in both military and civilian terminology.
Technically the original standard was 20 for the AR and 30 for the AK.
I've never seen 20 round mags for the AK. There are 10 round mags for states and countries with 10 round limits, but I've never seen 20. I'm sure they exist, someone has made just about anything you can imagine, but they are definitely not standard
@@filmandfirearms they are standard. Ive neve seen 10 round mags for aks. 10 round mags dont exist around here. You must live in a commie state like california or something if all you have is 10 round because califorrnia is gay like that.
30 rounds is standard capacity. Mags that can hold 40 are also standard capacity. Drum mags that can hold 50-75 are also...standard capacity.
Regardless of the type of firearm; someone has to (load bullets into a magazine,) chamber a round, disengage the safety, aim it at a person, and pull the trigger. It’s not an assault rifle, it’s an assault person.
Lots of good older short videos combined into one long video.
As others have pointed out, they do a good job at minimizing the factual errors about firearms that other channels often don't verify.
Very accurate video. Most people don't know most of this. The way I have always explained it is by definition, "An assault rifle is a select fire rifle that uses an intermediate-rifle cartridge and a detachable magazine." No one can walk into a gun shop and buy an assault rifle as you would normally purchase a firearm. What you can buy is a semi-auto sporting rifle that is based on the same cosmetic and ergonomic design. The difference is that select fire allows a weapon user to select between different modes of fire which includes a mode to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger. Semi-auto is like any gun that has been available since the dawn of firearms, one pull, one shot. To obtain an actual assault rifle is very hard and expensive to do and is only done by a very small number of enthusiasts who are willing to apply to the government for the ability to do so. Those opposed to the 2nd amendment often claim these civilian models are assault rifles, but they are not. During the 1990s, the government coined the term "Assault Weapon" that was confusing in order to attempt to ban certain arbitrary civilian sporting firearms which turned out to be a nightmare to enforce as it was easy to get around the clumsily written law. The law had a sunset clause, and congress had no interest in renewing it and so the term Assault Weapon doesn't hold any significance today while Assault Rifle still stands as its original definition which does not include sporting weapons commonly available to citizens. Any person who refers to the bulk of these firearms as assault rifles or assault weapons are either misinformed or attempting to misinform the public.
Those green tipped 556 rounds do not create a cavity. They just sail straight through meat without breaking up. The damage caused by cavitation from a FMJ or hollow point round is much more significant.
All rounds passing through soft tissue will create a temporary and permanent wound cavity, but yes, some more significantly than others.
green tips like most 556/223 rounds m855 green tip is designed to tumble,yaw, and disintegrate as it hits a soft target while the soft steel penetrator might sail through the lead body will not.
Simon, i appreciate your fairness of this video. As an american, i thought i was going to listen to a european talk out of his ass using mainstream propaganda as his arsenal the entire time.
This was certainly not the case though, and i appreciate you not doing so.
As an american, i know we all like to pretend that the 2nd ammendment has one reason, home defense and personal protection. However, this is false.
The founding fathers intended this to be a part of the non negotiable bill of rights for a few reasons. One is personal and home defense, sure. But they thought ahead. They had just fought a revolutionary war against a much higher power, using only hunting rifles and men that had no military training, but rather were fighting for their own freedom. So, the founders left it in as well as to deter other countries from invading the united states.
Another foreshadowed reason, and ill explain it in relation to ww2, is to deter the united states government from infringing unfair laws, taxes, or seizure of property on its citizens.
If the jews had all been armed during the horrendous acts the germans performed upon them during world war two, there wouldve at the very least have been a shit ton more dead germans and far less dead jews than history ended up being.
We know this because we have the example of the united states civil war. One side treated a group of people as if they were subhuman, undeserving of rights or property, acting attrociously towards them. The side that one was the side fighting with and on the behalf of those people, the african american slaves and abolishionist whites.
So no, america should not give up their guns no matter their function, cartridge, attachments, or intent, because the 2nd ammendment has always intended for the citizenship of the states to be able to be the primary threat to any opposing force, including its own government.
The gun violence issues we face today can be directly linked to mental health issues and resource hoarding. If you look at school shootings, an overwhelming amount of the children and young adults who commit these crimes are clinically disgnosed with one or multiple types of mental illnesses, and are more often than not, not given proper treatment resources and care.
The inner city urban gun crimes are often crimes involving theft or armed robbery, directly linked to how inner cities have less resources on average than suburban areas per capita. Theres enough good jobs in suburbs to fit the need, but theres not enough good jobs in cities to provide for people and their families. The other problem is a prideful culture. People would rather shoot someone for their car, or shoot someone over petty street beef, than admit that they could do better or that they are wrong. This is also a problem with most rap songs and hip hop pushing gang, drug, drinking, and baby mama culture.
Everyone wants to blame the tools used for the problem, but its really like 10-20 different problems all being improperly diagnosed or fixed.
America has had the majority of the worlds guns throughout its entire history, yet its only become a problem in the lsst 30 or 40 years, thats not a coincidence.
"What is an assualt pencil?"
What John wick uses as a backup of a backup weapon.
@@justinpyle3415 isk, but Joe Pecshi uses an assault pen in Goodfellas.
Which ever one has black plastic and auto loading lead
The one you get assaulted with. 🤔
A pencil that uses NaCl instead of an isotope of C for its lead?
I am a pleasantly surprised that Simon just stated facts and didn’t lean towards the left side at all. Nice job , man! Keep it up!!
This video should be shown to all politicians and mainstream media outlets. Outstanding, factual, and unbiased. Well done!
Holy crap, a 3 hour video about this subject? Dare I hold out hope that it debunks all the myths that anti-gun activists push?
An assault weapon is what you use to assault someone.
A defense weapon is what you use when someone assaults you.
Whenever any .gov agency puts out a solicitation for weapons broadly in the class of the AR-15, (usually with full auto or burst requirement), it's called a "Personal Defense Weapon". Wow, that sounds like what I would use it for.
Oh man, here we go. AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle which fires 1 round per trigger pull. AR stands for Armalite Rifle, not assault rifle. (As fully explained in this video)
and?
@@AnotherPointOfView944 and, I jumped the gun, forgive the pun! Simon coming in strong with unbiased facts. A wonderful explanation of history, engineering, and science.
What he said 🙄👆🏽
My favorite was Ian’s explanation of the AR-17 which was not only not an assault rifle, it was a shotgun.
@@jtec99 Well done on admitting your mistake of jumping the gun on the video. Most American gun nutters are a bit to dumb to do that.
Truly you are one of the intelligent few
Thank you for being very professional, objective and intellectually honest with this topic.
One of the best discussions on assault rifle history and characteristics I've heard. Very well done. The last bit about the cosmetic nature of the term "assault weapon" is particularly good, if brief.
If AR stands for Armalite rifle, what about the AR-24 pistol or the AR-17 shotgun? I believe it just stands for Armalite. It is a classic naming convention, Horton-Ho, Messerschmitt-Me, Heinkel-He, Sukhoi-Su, Mikoyan Gurevich-Mig, etc.
The AR in the entire line is just that. Armalite Model 1/2/3/etc...
Technically it's ARmalite rifle, not Armalite Rifle.
The ar just being the first 2 letters of Armalite
It is Armalite if there is a number behind it or if you're talking about Kalashnikov too, then you can say AK and AR.
The Va Tech shooter killed 32 with a pistol.
Or look at the Texas Tower shooter. Or the Navy Yard shooter using a shotgun.
Another aspect is tactics and training. Whether Uvalde or Parkland, there are useful questions about tactics, training, and building design.
Did I just watch 10 minutes of the same thing for the second time today? Come on bro
It’s not the same, he’s wearing a different shirt 😂
Thank you for bringing a fair and accurate account of the firearm issues.
Another Texas guy... Pleasantly surprised by the well-researched and written monolog about the AR. Excellent job!
It's anything the ruling class doesn't want the commoners to have, which is anything the commoners can use to defend themselves from the ruling class. And remarkably, many of the commoners support these measures.
Hahahhahaha. No
The US has more guns per capita than any other country and is a complete oligarchy. All those guns sure aren't doing anything about the the lazy rich royalty ruling over us.
Many of the commoners realize that other commoners, eager to please the ruling class, will just use the weapons on anything but the ruling class.
Your legal firearms against the US governments' fully auto M16s, stealth fighters, nuclear bombs, tanks, etc.
Imagine fancying your chances 😅
Look at the number of perps who get killed by cops with handguns. Their gun didn't protect them from their paranoia about the ruling class. And you think you can take on the government? 😆
It is democracy and respect for it that keeps you safe from the ruling class. Though with 50% of people in the US supporting an insurrectionist, that's in its last days now.
Because of propaganda produced by the ruling class.
My favorite example is their recent attempts to criminalize and scare the population over the affair of home made firearms to convince the people to give up their freedom to build firearms in their own homes after over two centuries.
Vietnam and Afghanistan faired pretty damn well against all that listed. Just saying
Before watching, as of 2019, there were only 500 deaths in the entirety of the US from rifles of ANY kind, for that year. That’s even counting self defense cases.
Edit: the only difference between an M16/M4 and an AR-15 is removal and changing of the fire control group. You can easily (but illegally) change it out for an M16 FCG.
I would like to thank the writers of this script, and Simon for presenting it in a factual, unbiased manner.
Yep, handguns account for the lion's share. Someone who intends to use it to harm you probably doesn't want you to see it.
"only 500".... FFS.
On what planet is that acceptable?
@@AnotherPointOfView944 that's negligible in a nation of 330 million people, think of the most bizarre and unlikely cause of death your mind can even fathom, and it's probably more than 500 annually.
What are you talking about?
@@AnotherPointOfView944 500 is a big number. 330 million is a bigger number.
2A all the way
Fun fact about the M-14: Italy did it first, and cheaper. Because, you see, Beretta had the last working Garand assembly line and used that for their BM-59, doing it cheaper by already having the assembly line and, somehow, faster.
And the gun worked so well that most M-14 you see in fiction are actually BM-59.
Knowledge, not ignorance. If only everyone would use this formula. This is great work here. Thank you for your hard work.
Never been this early
Happens to the best of us sometimes. Nothing to be ashamed about... ;-) -Daven
If it ain't got a 100 rd clip I don't want it....
🍿🍿🍿
lol, the fact that you called it a clip speaks volumes of your gun knowledge. LMFAO
@@thegrouch6666 Got one! Lol
😂🤣😹 *Ladies and gentlemen, the opinion of the unmarried marriage counselor & childless child expert! So speaks someone who obviously never had to hump any of that gear!*
So you want nothing but jams?
@@mwdouglas3794 I prefer jellies.
Assault is defined by the mind of the assailant not the weapon. Period. End
Its an enabler.
If you carry a toothpick you can injure someone a lot up close.
Carry a AR15 you can discretely injure someone at a distance.
Americans dont know the difference.
No it was actually because assault rifles were designed with ergonomics and form to be fired while mobile or "assaulting" a positon, this is contrasted to what at the time was the more common main battle rifles of the military that were designed to be fired from a stable positon. That's why the military named this class of weapon assault rifle when they were created.
Actually said by a leftist reporter: The shooter was carrying an assault pistol while wearing assault clothing.
@@dannyslag Not really, most any firearm being fired while not in a stable position is pretty darn inaccurate and pretty darn a waste of good ammunition... If one is moving while firing maybe a shotgun would be better, or maybe a low power handheld fully auto machine gun. The M16 is designed to be fired from a stable position... If on the move assaulting, maybe one wants to fix a bayonet... At least that is what I learned in the USMC...
That's not true. It is a military classification just like "general purpose machine gun" and "squad automatic weapon". It is defining a weapons role in military doctrine and does in fact have a definition of a box magazine fed, select fire rifle, chambered for an intermediate cartridge.
Look, I'm very pro-gun I own a whole safe of ARs. Trying to pretend a definition doesn't exist that anyone who ever served in a modern military knows exists isn't the path to a logical argument.
I have to admit I didn't expect this to be as fair and a perfect explanation of what things are classified as and why etc!
I'm impressed!
Cheers from Georgia USA ☮️🤘
The section of Assault Rifles was one of the best examples of the history and definition of assault rifle. Also the explanation of the difference of a M-16 and the AR-15. Thank you. I will be using this to explain these differences to people who don’t understand the definitions.
Simon is surprisingly based
?
i think guns are allowed in his country
@@edfost5734
Correct, he lives in Czech which has some of the least restrictive gun laws in Europe
@@calebbean1384 nice to see human rights respected in europe for a change
@edfost5734 Guns are accessible in most of Europe, and in some cases they can get things that are illegal in the US. The difference being its not a right to own firearms in any part of Europe its a privilege
It is humorous that the current debate the pro gun control side in the usa wants to say the AR platform is a military weapon when the case they like to cite is US v Miller (the first case to make it to SCOTUS dealing with gun control), though filled with major issues, said the sawed off shotgun could be regulated since it WASN'T a military weapon.
I've never heard anyone cite that case. And I worked in a gun store for years.
@@johnblack7294the Heller decision makes direct reference to the Miller decision.
Miller decision is an argument I always make and is the antithesis of what gun grabbers say now days.
Bruen decision shows it’s all bs anyhow
Both rifles and shotguns have minimum barrel lengths to be legally owned. Cutting them shorter is a crime
I've watched videos where a guy in California had an .22 AR rifle and a M1 Grand and was asking liberals which gun should be banned and which they thought was safer 😂😂 everyone picked the AR for being banned and the M1 as being a "safer" even tho the M1 has killed way more than an AR 😂😂
I love it when highly educated and intelligent politicians talk about the dangers of 30 clip magazines.
That was a thoughtful, well researched, truthful, and unbiased presentation on "What is an Assault Rifle." Well done, well done.
I was actually kinda surprised to see in the first part that your reporting on the AR-15 was pretty unbiased. Thank you for that sir.
17:30 I have 30 years experience in gunsmithing and I'll tell you, I always carry a Mini-14 before a AR15, like you said it's the same round and capability, just a wooden stock. I just like it better, my grouping is better too.
@@noiosobear6284 Who the hell deer hunts with a mini 14!‽? I know you CAN do it, but wtf would you?
Serious fudd energy
@@thechach050 🤣
#2AallDay
Too many of you aren’t too bright.
AR15’s and other military style weapons are SUPPOSED to be dangerous.
Those who argue a weapon isn’t dangerous simultaneously argue (for our adversaries) that in order for us to posses the weapon, it must not be dangerous.
Please please stop arguing this point!
The weapons protected by the 2nd amendment are SUPPOSED to be weapons of WAR.
We already posses crippled arms because our side makes dumb arguments like “hunting rifles are more powerful” or “AR15s just look scary”….like it’s some bid to be permitted to continue to own them.
The bottom line is that our military style weapons are not scary enough. nor powerful enough until they equal what the professional soldier they were designed to deter is issued.
The perfect NRA advertisement…
All weapons are weapons of war
@@davespanksalot8413how exactly is that a “perfect NRA advertisement”?
@@davidrobertson797 ruclips.net/video/kj3xsX9XMMY/видео.htmlsi=e-eGlM09RuaZeY4N
This really can't be said enough. Although it's also going to come down to the crowd you're with too.
I'm from Washington state, and arguing that we should have weapons of war would turn most of the people I know up there into the Brady Campaign Bunch - even moderates on the issue, which are the target crowd.
Out in my current southern state, I might use that argument to change a few people's minds on the unconstitutionality of the machine gun ban... if there's anyone left out here who doesn't think it's unconstitutional already.
As a gun guy, this is pretty good unbiased video. Well done, as usual.
I just came for the first 18 minutes expecting at least some bad propaganda here and there… but no. That was pretty factual and accurate without getting into the weeds. Bravo to you, sir!😊
Waiting for the arguements down here
Pineapple on pizza is awful.
Fight!
@@Justanotherconsumer Actually I agree. Pineapple is a terrible thing to put on a pizza.
@@Justanotherconsumer I said arguments, not facts.
@@Justanotherconsumer No lies detected.
This entire gun debate is a sham to fear monger people into submission. Can anybody explain why a gun is more dangerous than the 20 pounds of smokeless gunpowder you can legally own for muzzle loaders.
You can call an AR-15 an assault rifle all you want but once you call an AR an AK and an AK an AR it’s on sight
I remember hearing a news reporter refer to gunmen opening fire with "Ak-47s, Kalashnikovs, and assault rifles."
That was painful to hear.
They are both Assault Rifles period, full stop.
@@nonsuchanything used to assault anything is an assault thing.
Stabbing with a pencil - assault pencil
@justinpyle3415 the famous navy seal MRE asualt spork
@@justinpyle3415 I got stung by an assault wasp a few weeks ago.
As an American Marine i can definitely say that black/tan plastic is the heat seaking option. Real talk though. Military style arms is how and why we aren't British and had the abilitie to overthrow a tyrannical government of the king of England
LMAO you think that is how we overthrew England. First off, genius, the weapons in the 1770's was single shot SMOOTHBORE muskets. The war wasn't won with those in the hands of militia. IT was won with trained regular soldiers who also had artillery. It was also with a ton of help from the FRENCH NAVY.
@timothyhouse1622 while that was important, if there wasn't any of these muskets there would be no armed civilians able to stand against the British in Lexington and Concord, thus never starting the war in the way ours kicked off
@@isaackolman2861 you do realize both those battles were LOSSES, right? And the militia were wanting to raid British armories for REAL guns.
Let us know how that AR15 fairs against modern drones, artillery and tanks.
@timothyhouse1622 that would be a pretty good question to ask the viet cong, the taliban, and the Ukrainians currently fighting a much larger country. AR-15s and AK-47s work pretty well for fighting a guerilla war. Also, yes those battles were losses, but how many battles did Russia lose before pushing the germans all the way to Berlin?
@@timothyhouse1622you started out strong but then I watched in horror as you descended into gross ignorance. You could listen to The Bill Cosby routine about the war of independence and get a better education on the subject!
I take it that somehow in your long years of study you completely missed the minutemen, and that the Continental Army was a small and pathetic thing reinforced with local militias wherever engagements took place. It wasn't one. It wasn't the other. It was some of everything, but then we'd have to get into skirmishers, cavalry, artillery...
Your non biased and informed videos are why i subscribed to you. I wholeheartedly support the 2A and you Simon
I purchased 35 years ago a German Mauser 1898 rifle & bayonet. It is a bolt action beautiful made weapon. Germany has made some remarkable pistols and rifles for many decades. I love the feel of this rifle in your hands, firing it is a pure joy & I find myself at times going into my game/poker room just to look at the beautiful craftsmanship that went into making this rifle. Shalom
All I know is that every American should have one per the 2nd amendment of the constitution.
@15:57 This isnt true. Ar15s aren't by definition semi autos. All M16s and M4s are AR15s with select fire capabilities (obviously not all ar 15s are m16s or m4). Probably the definition for an ar15 is any weapon that uses the pattern for such device and ahears to its specifications for its reciever.
By patent, the AR15 as designed by Eugene Stoner was semi-automatic. It was after the military adopted it and redesignated it as the M16 that it gained select fire functionality.
So, according to the patent, the AR-15 is, by definition, semi auto.
@@kruger1932 The AR-15 was adapted from the select fire AR-10 which used the same patented gas impingement system. All the Armalite AR-15s were select fire from the beginning. The civilian semi-auto only Colt AR-15 Sporter was produced after the adoption of the M16. After that the AR-15 name became associated with the civilian version, and the M16 with the full auto version.
Let’s not be pedantic. The “AR15” as commonly used is indeed by definition SEMI auto since overwhelmingly it refers to civilian semi-auto rifles. Simon is correct in all but the narrowest, most pedantic sense, and since he obviously went to great pains to get this video correct on the facts, we firearms ethusiasts should be applauding the accuracy and great detail in the video instead of ankle biting at pedantic details.
@marcuspainter6861 might want to double check the patent on that one, you'll find that your statement is incorrect.
@@kruger1932 Certainly, The patents are available online. Which patent number should I look for?
Oh... From the title alone, this feels like it has the potential to incite an outright war in the comment section among gun enthusiasts 😅
I don't think it will be between "gun enthusiasts." Maybe a gun control debate between the left and right.
It won't, not on this channel.
@@thepax2621 and the so called “common sense” activists who believe the ammunition can “explode” an entire deer
Have already seen one guy make a joke. Just to have like 10 people tag them saying he is wrong because the idiots have zero sense of humour 😂
I think you mean a debate involving liberals - who in America are right of center, but don’t like guns - vs. conservatives, right-wingers and leftists, who all like guns.
How is it that this man from across the world is more knowledgeable, and has more information about firearms than the walking potatoes in the US government. Thank you for your service to the world Simon
The US government doesn't want people to be knowledgeable and that includes its own officials. Ignorance is easier to manipulate
30:15 I used this in airsoft to give the round projectiles a flatter trajectory, by making the projectile rotate as if a wheel rolling down the road it intitially rises as it leaves the barrel, but as it slows there is a quite long range where the ball literally flies through the air without dropping, and as the ground speed slows, it slowly loses lift.
Simon is a leftist
In 1654 the Danish Royal Guard used repeating flintlock rifles capable of firing 30 shots before reloading to defeat Swedish troops in Copenhagen. Don't ever let somebody tell you that such weapons did not exist until recently.
Go to Forgotten Weapons for a video on this
Absolutely love your stuff, Simon. Your gun stuff is among your best and you always present things objectively.
This is a surprisingly balanced video and points out exactly why every civilian should own one. It also helps describe why they would be ideal for home defense, especially for someone who is not necessarily military fit such as an elderly or disabled person or someone's small in stature.
It has been far too long since I heard the REAL classifications of an Assault Rifle. Thank you for this.
As a Californian, idk how putting a "fin" or a 90 degree grip makes an AK or AR15 any less "deadly" than when it has a normal pistol grip. Gonna get my first gun soon btw, a CZ75.
*PHENOMENAL.* High quality, thorough research that prioritizes logic and intellect over the feelings of emotions. These things were around for decades before the 90’s. Before the 90’s, kids had their firearms in school for woodshop. School owned rifles in their closets for shooting clubs. Rifles were in kids trucks parked outside. Hell, some shotguns were next to fishing rods in their own lockers! Seriously, you can find woodshop shotguns in gun shows to this day! During the Violent Crime Enforcement Act policies rolled out in 1993 and 1994 to fight drug and gang crime, firearms because prohibited at schools along with other things like the Assault Weapons Ban (all within the packet of laws under the Violet Crime Control Act.) While yes firearm homicide plummeted (homicide rate nearly HALVED)… you can thank the additional 100,000 police officers and their $10,000,000,000 of funding for that rather than guns not being in schools and assault weapons prohibited from purchase, given that the affected rifles were the LEAST reduced crime and school homicides began to RISE since they’ve been prohibited on schools (because OBVIOUSLY. Bad guys LOVE laws that good guys have to follow. It lets bad guys get unlimited access to as many kills as they want because there’s rules good guys follow that don’t allow them to defend.) It’s important to have intelligent conversations in these topics and remove emotional decision making that costs people their lives by regulating self defense with more rules bad guys happily don’t follow
Nice! Way more than I expected!
I really do appreciate the breakdown of what an AR-15 actually is. We need more demystification around firearms so people can understand what these terms mean realistically. As an 18-year-old in California, you can get a hunting license and purchase a hunting rifle that can shoot distances over 1000 yards and that has a much larger bullet size than the commonly critiqued .223/5.56 Ar-15 round. But we all need to understand that the 2nd amendment was not codified in law for hunting purposes but was done so to allow decent people to preserve their lives in the event that their lives are threatened, either by a citizen adversary or an adversarial, tyrannical government/invading force. Firearms, in places where bad people have the ability to acquire guns outside the bounds of the law, are simply life insurance policies that allow you to have at least a fighting chance to survive in an instance that might very well be your last.
Where do I submit my term paper on this subject? Excellent work!
Thank you for approaching the topic from a factual standpoint great job.