Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "How to Classify the H&K MP-7 and FN P90" video.

But Ian, you have also ignored the part in earlier video where SMG were filling in the demand for less powerfull and heavy semi and full auto guns that just happen to have pistol caliber since it was the only ammo less powerfull then full blown rifle available. And people didn't have funds to develop intermediate rounds yet. So there should be a distinction of SMGs before and after birth of AR. Because first would be trying to fill the niche of AR, but the latter would be specifically made as SMGs for one reason or another.
10
@djrug I've read your comment 3 times, I still don't find the part where it both makes sense and contradicts what I've just said. Can you elaborate how requiring a niche between the rifle and pistol will make either approach to filling it wrong or why a pitol wouldn't be also a common starting point since it uses the same ammo? I also fail to see pistol in Beretta 38 or Danuvia 43 or in M1 Carbine.
1
@djrug moreover, you might have noticed that MP-5 continued to fill the role of smaller alternative in NATO that had erroneously followed automatic rifle only doctrine for a few decades, but how SMGs largely died out in Warsaw Pact since shortened ARs filled their rol(at least with AK-74 and AKS-74U since during original AK service some leftover PPS and PPSh SMGs were still in use).
1
@tarmaque "Intermediate rounds did not begin with the AR" AR ie Assault Rifle. That's literary what Sturmgewehr was called. SMG ie Submachine Gun. You ie the guy, who somehow failed to see the context and decided to lecture another viewer of Ian on the basics. Thanks, but no, please, don't make me facepalm too much. And no, first intermediate rounds appeared during WWI.
1
@djrug have fun you two:D
1
@tarmaque so which of them were in production before 1943? Once again, bye
1