AK-47 and MP44?

It IS irrelevant - they are different weapons. The fact that another weapon type (or indeed a similar weapon type) IS copied has absolutely nothing to do with this case. Each weapon has its own development history.

Wow, you're nineteen, with a "few years of working with a gun dealership". Such qualifications. So presumably you'd believe that someone with 30 years of actually USING weapons, as well as researching, dealing etc has a slight edge over you? Read the ENTIRE topic again. Ezell (google for the name - see what his experience is) stated categorically in THE AK-47 STORY that AK is NOT a copy. And presumably since he's American he has no reason to keep it "a secret" becuase of the way things were under Communism. Oh, and for your particular information being nineteen with a few years of selling guns: "but i know alot more about guns than most" may hold true with regard to general public but on this forum you're low down on the list of knowledge and experience. If you get less opinionated and aggressive you might hang around long enough to learn something.

The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that made the unsupported (and insupportable) claim. The weight of evidence and professional judgement is against you.

Not from where I sit. You're just showing yourself to be an opinionated juvenile with nothing but his own limited knowledge to back him up.

 

What you are saying is basically:
1) A is a copy of B
2) Therefore C is a copy of D
That makes no sense at all.

I use the proper words to describe a situation.

You still haven't presented any facts, only circumstantial evidence (which isn'teven directed at the matter being discussed).

SMITH & SMITH. Small arms of the world - A basic manual of small arms. Harris burg (PA) : The Stackpole Company, 1973.

The AK-47 was build after the MP 44. So are the other rifles. If a general similarity is to be transferred to one weapon, it must be transferred to all.

What is the difference between a cosmetic and a significant difference? Since you have decided that there is one, I'd like a definition. Furthermore, is it completely incomprehensible that Kalashnikov have actually had original ideas?

'that': refers to the previous part of the sentence.
'they': refers to the two weapons
'function': method of operation
'is': should have been 'in', i.e. the connecting link between 'function' and the rest of the sentence
'different': not the same
'ways': addition to 'function'

Appeal to Pity

And I assume, then, that you have stripped all the weapons, stupied their individual components, and fired them?

Please restate.

I already stated that once. You want me to prove a negative, which is impossible. You are the one who wish for a claimto be accepted. For that, you need evidence.

I prefer, when possible, to use the words which describe a given situation.

 

Gentlemen, just a quiet word of warning from a Moderator...

Please keep this debate about guns, not about age, education and language. Back off the personal stuff and concentrate on the point in hand.

Thanks,
Ricky

 

Ricky, I agree as far as education and age. Improper language, however, is problematic, as it makes the arguments difficult to understand, and thus leads to misunderstandings.

 

I was thinking more in terms of

I agreethat clear language and good grammer/punctuation are important to a debate, and should be striven for. However, I am also advising caution in case the use of langauge becomes part of the debate. Plus, Riedmuller is apparently dyslexic, so this should be taken into consideration.

 

[self-edit]

 

Sorry Ricky i will leave it now. I have allways had a problem with my Dyslexia being on other forums for years so im used to it and it does give me a problem in cases like this and gets me frustrated more so when they use big words to throw me off
i suppose we all have our own opinions and no one will ever know for certain but i firmly belive the AK is an improved design on the STG44

 

Hi Riedmuller - you don't need to drop the debate, just keep the frustration in check.

 

I think those in favour of the theory that the Stg44 and the AK-47 are not related have made quite a convincing point. If you are unwilling to accept this, then that is your decision, but it hardly means that 'no one will ever know for certain'.

Riedmuller, Oli, Christian: never resort to personal attacks or irrelevant criticisms in the middle of a debate. This will not be tolerated by the moderators.

 

:angry:
I was away having fun for few days and ofcourse missed this heated debate!

Like Roel said: never use personal attacks. In my book, it really doesn't enhance your credibility.

 

My apologies to all. Especially Riedmuller.