Comments by "Ember Fist" (@emberfist8347) on "Forgotten Weapons" channel.

  1.  @HellbirdIV  Really where is your evidence the founding fathers weren't okay to have the people to keep and bear arms including cannons. Even the mainstream understands people could and did own cannons in the early days and that was legal under the Second Amendment.
    2
  2. That or a GB-22.
    2
  3.  @Edax_Royeaux  Not just the weight but the size. Have you seen Saving Private Ryan?
    2
  4. Doesn't mean they could make a ground mounted hmg like the M2. 12.7mm machine guns were the arsenal of Japan and the Soviet Union who used metric units.
    2
  5.  @michellebrown7714  I was talking about the terms used by the the troops. Nobody calls the A-10 the Thunderbolt II it is the Warthog. Or nobody calls the F-16 the Fighting Falcon it is the Viper.
    2
  6. I know this is basically a BB gun but still is kinda anti-climatic how almost silent the gun is after all the buildup of a handheld railgun.
    2
  7.  @mattthekiller9129  Well Italy had an Aircraft Carrier the Aquila and were building a second a carrier called the Sparverio that were never used. They were late to the game with both carriers being converted passenger liners when even Germany was building purpose built carriers. The problem, which plagued all Axis nations was their belief that Battleships would still rule the seas and Carriers wouldn’t surpass them. Italy’s tanks were mostly a combination of the lack of industry and the terrain of Italy. Italian industry wasn’t up for the war even with the build-up and so they had larger use of WWI equipment than every other major power save for France. Italy’s terrain isn’t conductive for large tanks due the narrow roads and mountainous terrain so combined with their limited industry, they mostly stuck to copies of the Carden Loyd Tankette and their main series was inspired by the Vickers Type E. They also did import some German AFVs getting 12 Panzer IIIs, Panzer IVs, and Stug IIIs each.
    2
  8. But we already bought a handgun that took someone’s eye so why not? Also the military models had the fixes implemented already.
    1
  9. No there are documented cases where that happens and because of the such as the SKS with its free-floating firing pin.
    1
  10. I would doubt that as vibrations should also mean the parts should come out of alignment from the shooter walking with it holstered.
    1
  11.  @akatripclaymore.9679  Well GE also made jet engines and auto cannons. I think General Motors making Grease Guns or Cadillac making Stoner 63s is more surprising.
    1
  12.  @Omegaworks-h4u Well they didn’t SOCOM requirements were put in mind for the MHS competition. I think they just haven’t switched over yet. Even then SOCOM has a history of flouting standard issue firearms like Delta Force using 1911 variants after the M9 was adopted for the Navy Seals using the Mark 25 which was based on the losing design for the XM9 trials.
    1
  13. @ It is needed.
    1
  14.  @thomasthetankengine5787 Honestly it sounds like the morons who ran the Ordnance Department in 1950-1960s have possessed the current members.
    1
  15. Which VPs are you talking about? Is it the one from the 1970s which had a staple gun trigger?
    1
  16. There is actually simpler commercial weapon out there Ian. The GB-22. Thing as only four parts.
    1
  17.  @jfangm  Exactly. The fix for the issue came out so fast as it was discovered during the trials for the M17/M18 guns and implemented on them but not the commercial P320s.
    1
  18. You realize 99% percent of guns are based on existing designs these days right?
    1
  19. Does that include the grip safety?
    1
  20.  @Paelorian I don’t think the incident is impossible. We know that MGs are prone to cook off and OP said it was a Sherman. That means the Coaxial would be an M1919 Browning, the risk of cook-off is documented to exist with that weapon as the South Africans who live in a similar climate as India modified the design to fire from an open bolt to make the MG4 to avoid this issue.
    1
  21.  @XF3693  Carbine was meant for REMF Real Echelon Mother F***ers
    1
  22.  @copter2000 No sir. The budget of the next five years.
    1
  23. No there Remington never fixed the military guns because they didn’t have an issue to begin with. SIG fixed the discharge issue with the military models first and then only fixed the civilian models when the issues came to light.
    1
  24.  @williambefort5327 But I don’t they would it is a brand name. It is like how Czerka Brod gun has an CZ in its name.
    1
  25.  @TheBradyrulez Except the Glock is inferior with its lack of modularity.
    1
  26. Chevy’s reputation did suffer back then. Ralph Nader criticized it in his book Unsafe At Any Speed which blew the issue up. And GM was sued for their spying on Ralph.
    1
  27.  @SoloRenegade Which you fail to do as Ian gave the right definition. Such as claiming a semi-auto rifle like the Ruger 10/22 chambered in .22LR meets his assault rifle definition when he said intermediate cartridge or ignoring what a Battle Rifle is.
    1
  28.  @SoloRenegade  It isn’t arbitrary it means any round that is less powerful and smaller than a full-size rifle round but larger and more powerful than a pistol round. .22LR is a pistol round ergo a 10/22 isn’t an assault rifle.
    1
  29.  @SoloRenegade  Don’t move the goalposts this is getting absurd and you are proving you know nothing about firearms. 1.) I got the definition from the literal mechanical definition of Assault Rifle starting with the original Sturmgewher which fired a 7.92x33mm Kurz cartridge. 2) If you don’t know what a full power rifle round is you need to watch the video again as Ian explains. 3) If you can’t figure out if a round is a pistol round, you need to really to start doing more research as it is self-explanatory.
    1
  30.  @SoloRenegade  You want to bring sources into this when Ian explains this all in the video? Is that not a citable source? I mentioned the video in my comment.
    1
  31.  @SoloRenegade  You are going to ignore the person who made the video is a firearms expert with published books to his name particularly those related to the evolution, development, and history of military firearms? I gave a valid definition but you choose to ignore it.
    1
  32.  @SoloRenegade  This is not a case of appeal to authority as it implies Ian didn't back up his definition which he did.
    1
  33.  @SoloRenegade  You are the childish one here. Ian answers everything in the video but you choose to reject the reality of the video.
    1
  34.  @SoloRenegade  I give you simple facts and you decide to ignore them.
    1
  35.  @SoloRenegade  No I point out the fact the video give the official definition for an assault rifle and the origin of it. Those are facts. You are the one spouting opinions.
    1
  36.  @SoloRenegade  You can’t cite a video what the hell? Do you not know how citations work of course you can cite a video. You have the video right in front of you backing up my facts. As for your opinions literally everyone from claiming the assault rifle definition should include the M1 or M1A are opinions and factually wrong ones at that.
    1
  37.  @SoloRenegade  I have been able to cite videos in the past with no problem man you are clearly showing you don't know crap.
    1
  38.  @hobbitronic  Except no the types of cars that are regulated aren't because of matters of they could kill the people if you get hit by one. It is either about driver and passenger safety, or clinging onto an and long outdated legal dispute with Europeans that has so many holes in it you can call it Swiss Cheese (The Chicken Tax)
    1
  39.  @nehcrum  Except you are ignoring that boar aren't the only thing you need to hunt. There are also deer, bear, etc. And that is why five rounds is a stupid restriction.
    1
  40.  @nehcrum  Except the thing about hunting is you tend to need follow up shots just in case. Lets say you are hunting a deer in the woods and accidentally end up facing a bear, you will need a lot of follow up shots as that bear will take more rounds than a deer.
    1
  41.  @HellbirdIV  Except that is not the militia. The US Army is the successor to the Continental Army while the Milita was a separate organization during the Revolution.
    1
  42.  @jackcr3937  A car door is a thin piece of metal. I would like to introduce you to the animal known as the bear which could easily shrug off a .30-06
    1
  43.  @nehcrum  That is called a strawman argument. Besides Spitsbergen is in Norway which has gun control meaning five rounds is all that is legal which is another problem.
    1
  44.  @nehcrum  .44 Magnum is a different beast altogether from .30-06. And keep in mind .44 magnum isn't limited to five rounds or bolt action.
    1
  45.  @HellbirdIV  You are still clinging to this absurd argument? The right is for the people to keep and bear arms not the government.
    1
  46. ​ @nehcrum  If you know anything about guns you would know that most people don't carry one in the chamber due to safety concerns.
    1
  47.  @AshleyPomeroy  A few. Like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
    1
  48.  @hugobloemers4425 Google Translate is garbage.
    1
  49.  @nicholashodges201 Except they didn’t really have Stormtroopers use it. By the time it got rebranded they Sturmgewher, the rifle was handed to anyone who looked like they could carry it.
    1
  50. To me one of the more interesting stories is the opposite. Remington started making guns and they would branch into things bikes and typewriters.
    1