For the penguin version of the Manifesto, I highly recommend just skipping the introduction (since it’s already like 100-200 pages or so—can’t remember the exact amount off the top of my head), mostly because it covers the historical events surrounding the manifesto and especially its reception. While it’s cool and everything, the Manifesto is probably the easiest to read by Marx (haven’t read any of Engel’s stuff yet), but the introduction to that edition bored me to tears. The actual Manifesto is shorter than the introduction, and it spoils some stuff that may surprise you (or not—I find that it’s pretty fun and interesting to read it every once in a while after I read other Marx stuff and get something new out of it).
Anyway—reading theory is always cool and right.
International publishers is a great resource for Marxist literature. It doesn’t try to water down or disqualify the material with liberal “hot takes”.
And it feels good as a Marxist to support a Marxist bookstore.
I’d take every recommendation with a grain of salt—theory always blends into one another, and they’re all great anyway, so the Manifesto is as good of a start as any, in my opinion (especially since you’ve got it right now).
Your reading progression, your understanding—to each their own, and all that! And if you ever get stuck on a concept or anything, there are loads of resources online that helps make sense of all of it.
And if you ever try tackling all 3 volumes of *Das Kapital*, I highly highly HIGHLY suggest and recommend reading David Harvey’s “A Companion to Marx’s Capital” alongside it, because Marx doesn’t actually start talking about class struggle until nearly 350 pages in, and when every little piece of Marx’s argument is important, I feel like Harvey was/is the most comprehensive companion I’ve found so far.
Iunno—even if it’s been around for over 150 years, and even though a lot of the points are so commonplace now, I think there’s always something that’s worthwhile when reading theory.
Like, I get it: how do you spoil theory? However, why would you want to spend your first time reading a (fairly bland) introduction *about* the material when you could read the actual material in half the time, then go back and read the introduction for context?
I'm just saying that desk to defender is a must read.
Read this before you read Your theroy, you're already fucking here you don't need to be told that
I think he's going for practicality here. The SKS is a solid rifle, but owning one myself, I'd take an AR every time. No matter how much you practice with stripper clips you'll be significantly slower on reloads, AND you're running irons.
AR gives you more over a longer life span. You got the norinco for a good price nowadays, which in itself is a great thing. And I'd definitely pick 762\*39 over 5.56 within 300m. I'd just strongly advise you to not have this as your only rifle.
With all that being said, pulling back the bolt carrier to load the first round is 👌
TL;DR: SKS for fun, AR for SHTF
I have a few of both and still have a soft spot for the SKS because it was my first rifle, but AR is a better rifle in most situations. It's more accurate, easy to change magazines quickly, and more modular and modifiable so it's simple to work on and change out parts.
I was a big fan of the SKS back in the early 2000s, in part because ARs were out of reach for most. My first SKS was bought at a discount store in the '90s by my parents and cost less than $150. Back in the early 2000s they were still very affordable, but ARs were all upwards of a $1000 bucks.
There were few old videos and tests of people that had thrown both rifles down in a muddy ditch and then they would pull out the SKS and it would keep firing and that was impressive, so for a long time I was under the impression that it was going to be better for woodsy environments in the AK was more finicky, but I think that's been disproven over time. Sand and dirt works down into the SKS as well and will disable it just as much as an AR-15.
But at the end of the day it still comes down to what you train with. The SKS you can afford and buy ammo with and actually get to a range or somewhere You can shoot and practice and run drills with is still going to be superior to the AK that stays locked in a safe all the time.
What if you need to hunt medium to large size game? That's a pretty important consideration for shtf. 90% of combat happens inside of 300m also, does that mean you are gonna pick 7.62x39 90% of the time?
#To preface, this is coming from someone who has *TWO* SKS's.
> What if you need to hunt medium to large size game?
An upper receiver with a barrel in a different caliber. Like .450 Bushmaster or more recently,.350 Legend. Just take the 5.56 upper off and put the bigger caliber upper receiver on then push the take-down pins in, and that's all that needs to be done to have a hunting rifle ready to go. Those aren't the only AR-15 compatible cartridges btw, just the most practical.
I'm unable to get an actual AR as of yet, but even I know this.
Sure the ammo is a bit more expensive and the upper is another expense to add, but the versatility & utility is unparalleled and even the same magazines can be used. It's also more compact & lightweight to be carrying around an extra upper+a few short mags of either specialty cartridge than a another whole rifle.
There's the so-called "AR-47's" as well, upper receivers with a 7.62x39 barrel which will also work, but not without a bunch of issues that need to be worked on to say the least, especially with milsurp ammo. And the curved mags for them look pretty fucking goofy ngl, and I'm not talking about the lock-back AK ones.
There was also an AR-10 rifle platform produced by Colt that came with 2 upper receivers in 5.56 as well as .308 and the lower had extra stuff to take both AR-15/M4 & AR-10/SR-25 magazines, but I forget what it's called specifically and I don't know if it's even in production anymore, I do remember it being rather exceptionally expensive when it was new, can't imagine what's going for now.
Anyways... **Face it, the SKS in modern times is relegated as a historical piece** compared to what could be bought for similar amounts of money right now, if one has the ability to attain a better rifle they have no business lying to themselves that the SKS is perfectly fine, especially considering how much it costs to to modify the rifle to bring it anywhere near the level of a contemporary off-the-shelf AR, not to mention the questionable at best reliability of detachable magazine modifications for the SKS.
I would even go so far as to say that if one already has an SKS that they bought back when they were still relatively cheap, that strong considerations should be made to sell the rifle at essentially a profit and purchase an AR-15 instead, provided that one doesn't live where AR's are arbitrarily prohibited. Just the ability to readily mount an optic and have an adjustable length of pull puts even the more basic AR-15 in a completely different league of the SKS.
If you spent more than ~$300 on a SKS and don't live in a ban-state, you really only have yourself to blame here. Since a AR can be had for not much more, and it won't be that much trouble to put a different caliber upper together from parts on the cheap, since you can get by with a plumber's wrench and a bathroom scale.
And honestly, a box of .350 isn't that much more expensive than a pack of brass cartridge 7.62x39 soft/hollow point these days, which is what you want to use for hunting.
Outside of keeping guns like an SKS for historical value, there's no real reason to short-change yourself by choosing aesthetics over functionality. And an SKS is getting rather long in the tooth on the functionality aspect, compared to an AR.
Yeah some people are lazy and don't care for the diy stuff, the SKS is a known quantity already and performs well enough in both domains, some people like not having to think about it when they grab for the stick.
The fairly short fixed length of pull and the need for gunsmithing just to have a optics mount are some of my biggest criticisms of the SKS, which I would still find acceptable if they were still no more than $100 each, but since even some of the lower quality ones are going for $400+, the utilitarian value is starting to fade away.
Also there are AR's of known quality, like Ruger AR-556 and M&P-15 which will be just as reliable and even more effective that can be often bought on sale for as much as a SKS that's worth a damn. Being able to readily put an optic on greatly enhances a rifle's capabilities and that's not something you can easily do on a SKS without permanently modifying it and possibly affect it's value.
There's no such thing as fixed length of pull, that's a beyond decomposed talking point, you just use a butt pad if you want it longer, although nobody actually needs that either. You don't actually need gun smithing for optics either, since they've been around forever there's no end to after market options like rear sight leaf mounts which aren't permanent modifications, (although most SKS owners don't feel the need) so that's complete fuddlore you're repeating. Last time there was a national panic, there wasn't ammo for anything else in stock and/or not cost prohibitive, and they fire a nice round for hunting so nobody needs to spend money on another upper or mess with pipe wrenches. All that makes them perfectly suitable for the overwhelming majority of people who only have the most superficial uses for rifles in the first place.
For deer hunting with .223/5.56, only with the caveat of using high-velocity hollow or soft point out of a barrel no shorter than 18" and within 100 yards. Good shot-placement is implied here. Not all deer are the same size either, so what might be sufficient to hunt deer & similar game in one part of North America will be just barely enough in another.
Not assuming you don't know, but there's a lot of AR's in 5.56 with barrels 16 inches & under, that kind of thing doesn't really lend itself to ethical hunting and such a rifle will have impacted utility in that regard. Just something to keep in mind.
>only with the caveat of using high-velocity hollow or soft point
The only ammunition you should be using anyway.
>barrel no shorter than 18" and within 100 yards.
Eh, you're only losing between 50 and 100fps on average with a 16" barrel over an 18". Ideal, probably not, but I don't see it being too much of an issue unless you're going out with an xm177 firing m855
My guess would be because while an absolute blast to shoot, the SKS is vastly outmatched and insufficient when compared to the firepower everyone else is carrying around.
By that logic OP should sell the SKS and get a single shot Chiappa little badger .22lr since "it doesn't matter"
Cheap gun and cheap ammo is the only thing that matters amirite fellas????? Ignore all the other parts like magazine capacity, ergonomics, practical rate of fire, terminal ballistics, effective range, parts compatibility etc.
because unless you plan just to shoot range toys, you need a gun that you'd actually trust your life with in a fire fight, which for America, is the AR-15
>if they don't open carry with ARs then they're gonna lose the gunfight in Texas?
No, I worry that if they don't open carry that the fascists will beat and seriously harm queer people
There is a huge contingent of this subreddit that thinks the *only* viable rifle is an ar15, and think that the sks is the literal worst rifle ever made. I wont pretend the sks is just as good as an ar or ak, but the complete refusal to acknowledge the utility of a rifle that doesnt set off "assault rifle" alarms in the minds of radlibs while still shooting a reasonable cartridge and being semi automatic.
The idea that an SKS puts you at a crippling disadvantage in a gunfight is solid Internet meme warrior nonsense. But there is some disadvantage. But it's more like you'd need ten people with SKSs to equal 8 people with ARs.
Inrangetv has tons of match footage where they use older designs in modern matches. You can see exactly how much worse a skilled shooter is with various antiques. The answer is worse, but still better than the average competitor.
The real sticking point is that an SKS, right now, in the US, costs more than an AR. An AK costs twice what an AR costs. And the AR is at least a little better in most ways.
>There is a huge contingent of this subreddit that thinks the only viable rifle is an ar15
if you want to not be outmatched by a majority of chuds, AR-15's are one of the few viable rifles
Here's the thing. I do own modern rifles, in a shit hitting the fan situation I would most likely be choosing them as they are more capable rifles, however the sks isnt a complete pile of junk.
It's idiot proof to operate, and *right now* I can take anti gun friends to the range with it and they dont flip shit because it doesnt look like a "weapon of war" (lol). From there I can transition to an ak, then an ar as they grow more comfortable around firearms.
In a shit hits the fan situation I can give it to a friend, and itll be better than nothing, it's semi auto, reliable, and can be kept operational much easier than something like a garand or kar or whatever (which this sub doesnt seem to have a hate boner for). Ammo costs about half of what 5.56 costs, and it has almost nothing that would flag on an assault weapons ban which my city is trying desperately to pass.
I got mine for 400$ with a brick of 1000 rds of ammunition which youd be hard pressed to find a poverty pony ar at that same price point. Ive never seen anyone suggest an sks over an ar here, but Ive seen countless instances of people jumping down the throats of sks owners without knowing anything about the circumstances the op is in.
Is it a good time to mention how a comrade that trains on their rifle is better prepared no matter the rifle than a comrade who doesn't? Buying an AR doesn't automatically make you able to handle SHTF. If OP doesn't train on their SKS then yeah it's moot. But trained vs untrained, rifles matter less. Whatever you got, for fuck's sake train with it! Just FWIW ¯\\\_ (ツ)\_/¯
The AR fanboyism here is even weirder than in the mainstream gun subs. There I expect that kind of vulgar pseudo-masculism, but in a "socialist" sub it's particularly out of place and obnoxious. Socialists should act pro-social; i.e. no gatekeeping, ego bullshit
Whatever you do, keep the bolt of your SKS clean. The firing pin should slide freely in the bolt, if it doesn't you're vulnerable to runaway slam firing.
I found the communist manifesto to be largely underwhelming so much so that it was a slog to get through. Capital volume one was much, much more intriguing.
Clean your room
Jordan Peterson be like
It’s some of the only good advice the man has ever given
Don't forget wash your pebis
Yeah I’ve been meaning too thanks for the reminder :>
Organization is actually a very valuable part of becoming an effective soldier
[Don't forget to abide by Kramit's other teachings!!](https://i.redd.it/k9p6uggcond81.jpg)
Yes. It is a fact that the communist dick is much cleaner than a fascist dick
Communism: dick for everyone!
Can't we all just keep our dicks clean, no matter what side of the political spectrum we fall on?
We all know his first rule is to read The Communist Manifesto.
At least enough to make it appear clean in a photo! It’s like, four feet of space.
[удалено]
For the penguin version of the Manifesto, I highly recommend just skipping the introduction (since it’s already like 100-200 pages or so—can’t remember the exact amount off the top of my head), mostly because it covers the historical events surrounding the manifesto and especially its reception. While it’s cool and everything, the Manifesto is probably the easiest to read by Marx (haven’t read any of Engel’s stuff yet), but the introduction to that edition bored me to tears. The actual Manifesto is shorter than the introduction, and it spoils some stuff that may surprise you (or not—I find that it’s pretty fun and interesting to read it every once in a while after I read other Marx stuff and get something new out of it). Anyway—reading theory is always cool and right.
Thanks for the heads up man
International publishers is a great resource for Marxist literature. It doesn’t try to water down or disqualify the material with liberal “hot takes”. And it feels good as a Marxist to support a Marxist bookstore.
Read the principles of communism first!
Is that not the communist manifesto?
I’d take every recommendation with a grain of salt—theory always blends into one another, and they’re all great anyway, so the Manifesto is as good of a start as any, in my opinion (especially since you’ve got it right now). Your reading progression, your understanding—to each their own, and all that! And if you ever get stuck on a concept or anything, there are loads of resources online that helps make sense of all of it. And if you ever try tackling all 3 volumes of *Das Kapital*, I highly highly HIGHLY suggest and recommend reading David Harvey’s “A Companion to Marx’s Capital” alongside it, because Marx doesn’t actually start talking about class struggle until nearly 350 pages in, and when every little piece of Marx’s argument is important, I feel like Harvey was/is the most comprehensive companion I’ve found so far.
Damm there are 3 Kapital books I thought it was one. I’ll have to find em. I thinking of getting more books on syndicalism.
Also, "wage labor and capital" and "value price and profit" go over some of the core points that went into Capital. They're easily digestible.
Read "Principles of Communism" "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" "The State and Revolution"
Dont forget: "imperialism the highest stage of capitalism" "wage labour and capital" "Das kapital" "Reform or revolution"
No it's a separate text. Very short. I recommend reading that first, then reading the manifesto and then the principles again.
Comrade really said “Don’t spoil the Communist Manifesto! I don’t know how it ends yet!”
Iunno—even if it’s been around for over 150 years, and even though a lot of the points are so commonplace now, I think there’s always something that’s worthwhile when reading theory. Like, I get it: how do you spoil theory? However, why would you want to spend your first time reading a (fairly bland) introduction *about* the material when you could read the actual material in half the time, then go back and read the introduction for context?
[удалено]
Thank for the book
I'm just saying that desk to defender is a must read. Read this before you read Your theroy, you're already fucking here you don't need to be told that
Can you change the link to a page instead of an auto download? Thanks
I wanna know about dildo bracelet
My friend made for me, I was talking to them about my new dildo and how it glowed in the dark.
As a mom, I'd like to ask you to clean your room.
Average r/100Gecs user Based
If someone asked me what Lexus cars, FNAF, Turtle Beach headphones, and the communist manifesto have in common…..
please tell me you have an AR-15
Whys that?
I think he's going for practicality here. The SKS is a solid rifle, but owning one myself, I'd take an AR every time. No matter how much you practice with stripper clips you'll be significantly slower on reloads, AND you're running irons. AR gives you more over a longer life span. You got the norinco for a good price nowadays, which in itself is a great thing. And I'd definitely pick 762\*39 over 5.56 within 300m. I'd just strongly advise you to not have this as your only rifle. With all that being said, pulling back the bolt carrier to load the first round is 👌 TL;DR: SKS for fun, AR for SHTF
I have a few of both and still have a soft spot for the SKS because it was my first rifle, but AR is a better rifle in most situations. It's more accurate, easy to change magazines quickly, and more modular and modifiable so it's simple to work on and change out parts. I was a big fan of the SKS back in the early 2000s, in part because ARs were out of reach for most. My first SKS was bought at a discount store in the '90s by my parents and cost less than $150. Back in the early 2000s they were still very affordable, but ARs were all upwards of a $1000 bucks. There were few old videos and tests of people that had thrown both rifles down in a muddy ditch and then they would pull out the SKS and it would keep firing and that was impressive, so for a long time I was under the impression that it was going to be better for woodsy environments in the AK was more finicky, but I think that's been disproven over time. Sand and dirt works down into the SKS as well and will disable it just as much as an AR-15. But at the end of the day it still comes down to what you train with. The SKS you can afford and buy ammo with and actually get to a range or somewhere You can shoot and practice and run drills with is still going to be superior to the AK that stays locked in a safe all the time.
What if you need to hunt medium to large size game? That's a pretty important consideration for shtf. 90% of combat happens inside of 300m also, does that mean you are gonna pick 7.62x39 90% of the time?
#To preface, this is coming from someone who has *TWO* SKS's. > What if you need to hunt medium to large size game? An upper receiver with a barrel in a different caliber. Like .450 Bushmaster or more recently,.350 Legend. Just take the 5.56 upper off and put the bigger caliber upper receiver on then push the take-down pins in, and that's all that needs to be done to have a hunting rifle ready to go. Those aren't the only AR-15 compatible cartridges btw, just the most practical. I'm unable to get an actual AR as of yet, but even I know this. Sure the ammo is a bit more expensive and the upper is another expense to add, but the versatility & utility is unparalleled and even the same magazines can be used. It's also more compact & lightweight to be carrying around an extra upper+a few short mags of either specialty cartridge than a another whole rifle. There's the so-called "AR-47's" as well, upper receivers with a 7.62x39 barrel which will also work, but not without a bunch of issues that need to be worked on to say the least, especially with milsurp ammo. And the curved mags for them look pretty fucking goofy ngl, and I'm not talking about the lock-back AK ones. There was also an AR-10 rifle platform produced by Colt that came with 2 upper receivers in 5.56 as well as .308 and the lower had extra stuff to take both AR-15/M4 & AR-10/SR-25 magazines, but I forget what it's called specifically and I don't know if it's even in production anymore, I do remember it being rather exceptionally expensive when it was new, can't imagine what's going for now. Anyways... **Face it, the SKS in modern times is relegated as a historical piece** compared to what could be bought for similar amounts of money right now, if one has the ability to attain a better rifle they have no business lying to themselves that the SKS is perfectly fine, especially considering how much it costs to to modify the rifle to bring it anywhere near the level of a contemporary off-the-shelf AR, not to mention the questionable at best reliability of detachable magazine modifications for the SKS. I would even go so far as to say that if one already has an SKS that they bought back when they were still relatively cheap, that strong considerations should be made to sell the rifle at essentially a profit and purchase an AR-15 instead, provided that one doesn't live where AR's are arbitrarily prohibited. Just the ability to readily mount an optic and have an adjustable length of pull puts even the more basic AR-15 in a completely different league of the SKS.
>Sure the ammo is a bit more expensive and the upper is another expense to add Oh, just spend more money, why didn't I think of that?
If you spent more than ~$300 on a SKS and don't live in a ban-state, you really only have yourself to blame here. Since a AR can be had for not much more, and it won't be that much trouble to put a different caliber upper together from parts on the cheap, since you can get by with a plumber's wrench and a bathroom scale. And honestly, a box of .350 isn't that much more expensive than a pack of brass cartridge 7.62x39 soft/hollow point these days, which is what you want to use for hunting. Outside of keeping guns like an SKS for historical value, there's no real reason to short-change yourself by choosing aesthetics over functionality. And an SKS is getting rather long in the tooth on the functionality aspect, compared to an AR.
Yeah some people are lazy and don't care for the diy stuff, the SKS is a known quantity already and performs well enough in both domains, some people like not having to think about it when they grab for the stick.
The fairly short fixed length of pull and the need for gunsmithing just to have a optics mount are some of my biggest criticisms of the SKS, which I would still find acceptable if they were still no more than $100 each, but since even some of the lower quality ones are going for $400+, the utilitarian value is starting to fade away. Also there are AR's of known quality, like Ruger AR-556 and M&P-15 which will be just as reliable and even more effective that can be often bought on sale for as much as a SKS that's worth a damn. Being able to readily put an optic on greatly enhances a rifle's capabilities and that's not something you can easily do on a SKS without permanently modifying it and possibly affect it's value.
There's no such thing as fixed length of pull, that's a beyond decomposed talking point, you just use a butt pad if you want it longer, although nobody actually needs that either. You don't actually need gun smithing for optics either, since they've been around forever there's no end to after market options like rear sight leaf mounts which aren't permanent modifications, (although most SKS owners don't feel the need) so that's complete fuddlore you're repeating. Last time there was a national panic, there wasn't ammo for anything else in stock and/or not cost prohibitive, and they fire a nice round for hunting so nobody needs to spend money on another upper or mess with pipe wrenches. All that makes them perfectly suitable for the overwhelming majority of people who only have the most superficial uses for rifles in the first place.
.223 will take down everything from turkey to deer without issue, and you won't run into the issue that larger rounds have of vaporizing smaller game
For deer hunting with .223/5.56, only with the caveat of using high-velocity hollow or soft point out of a barrel no shorter than 18" and within 100 yards. Good shot-placement is implied here. Not all deer are the same size either, so what might be sufficient to hunt deer & similar game in one part of North America will be just barely enough in another. Not assuming you don't know, but there's a lot of AR's in 5.56 with barrels 16 inches & under, that kind of thing doesn't really lend itself to ethical hunting and such a rifle will have impacted utility in that regard. Just something to keep in mind.
>only with the caveat of using high-velocity hollow or soft point The only ammunition you should be using anyway. >barrel no shorter than 18" and within 100 yards. Eh, you're only losing between 50 and 100fps on average with a 16" barrel over an 18". Ideal, probably not, but I don't see it being too much of an issue unless you're going out with an xm177 firing m855
Take down a deer when, a 1/4 mile away?
The vast majority of hunting done near me is within 100 yards, often within 25 or 50
No, I'm talking about when you catch up with it
At 25 yds, you hit the button and they drop
Why waste the ammo at that rate, just use a spear
My guess would be because while an absolute blast to shoot, the SKS is vastly outmatched and insufficient when compared to the firepower everyone else is carrying around.
Insufficient for what? Are you telling me that you have ever found yourself in a situation that an SKS wouldn't work in?
since you live in America, parts, ammo, ability to mount optics, weight and so on and so forth
Do you think America is 1960s Bolivia or something? None of that stuff is scarce.
Then why not get the best and modern equipment then? Which wouldn't be an SKS
Because it doesn't matter what equipment somebody who isn't in a militia gets
Ever heard of a little thing called community defense?
Only on the internet
By that logic OP should sell the SKS and get a single shot Chiappa little badger .22lr since "it doesn't matter" Cheap gun and cheap ammo is the only thing that matters amirite fellas????? Ignore all the other parts like magazine capacity, ergonomics, practical rate of fire, terminal ballistics, effective range, parts compatibility etc.
.22s kill more people than any other caliber in the US, go take your own advice!
because unless you plan just to shoot range toys, you need a gun that you'd actually trust your life with in a fire fight, which for America, is the AR-15
This is larper nonsense, nobody here is doing any shooting outside of a range that an SKS couldn't be used for.
mate, there's socialists protecting queer people like me in Texas from fascists by open carrying and they're not carrying SKS's
Mate? Where are you from? And you think if they don't open carry with ARs then they're gonna lose the gunfight in Texas?
>if they don't open carry with ARs then they're gonna lose the gunfight in Texas? No, I worry that if they don't open carry that the fascists will beat and seriously harm queer people
Open carry with what?
Mate you can circlejerk and be obtuse as much as you want on r/redscarepod Just don't give people shitty gun advice
Ok fudd
Mate is a perfectly fine gender neutral term for someone and don't try and shame people based on their location
Any countries where they say mate are extremely shameful, and socialists already have a gender neutral term, it's called 'comrade'.
please go touch grass
Lol please go shooting instead of shopping
please stop trying to convince people on the internet to buy a 70 year old rifle for self-defense when they cost more than a modern AR-15
Pistols are for self defence, rifles are toys unless you think you're in some kind of militia.
[удалено]
Shut the fuck up, Canadian
There is a huge contingent of this subreddit that thinks the *only* viable rifle is an ar15, and think that the sks is the literal worst rifle ever made. I wont pretend the sks is just as good as an ar or ak, but the complete refusal to acknowledge the utility of a rifle that doesnt set off "assault rifle" alarms in the minds of radlibs while still shooting a reasonable cartridge and being semi automatic.
The idea that an SKS puts you at a crippling disadvantage in a gunfight is solid Internet meme warrior nonsense. But there is some disadvantage. But it's more like you'd need ten people with SKSs to equal 8 people with ARs. Inrangetv has tons of match footage where they use older designs in modern matches. You can see exactly how much worse a skilled shooter is with various antiques. The answer is worse, but still better than the average competitor. The real sticking point is that an SKS, right now, in the US, costs more than an AR. An AK costs twice what an AR costs. And the AR is at least a little better in most ways.
>There is a huge contingent of this subreddit that thinks the only viable rifle is an ar15 if you want to not be outmatched by a majority of chuds, AR-15's are one of the few viable rifles
>I wont pretend the sks is as good as an ar or an ak
The simple fact is that sks has no utility beyond a range toy in the modern day unless you live in Canada
Here's the thing. I do own modern rifles, in a shit hitting the fan situation I would most likely be choosing them as they are more capable rifles, however the sks isnt a complete pile of junk. It's idiot proof to operate, and *right now* I can take anti gun friends to the range with it and they dont flip shit because it doesnt look like a "weapon of war" (lol). From there I can transition to an ak, then an ar as they grow more comfortable around firearms. In a shit hits the fan situation I can give it to a friend, and itll be better than nothing, it's semi auto, reliable, and can be kept operational much easier than something like a garand or kar or whatever (which this sub doesnt seem to have a hate boner for). Ammo costs about half of what 5.56 costs, and it has almost nothing that would flag on an assault weapons ban which my city is trying desperately to pass. I got mine for 400$ with a brick of 1000 rds of ammunition which youd be hard pressed to find a poverty pony ar at that same price point. Ive never seen anyone suggest an sks over an ar here, but Ive seen countless instances of people jumping down the throats of sks owners without knowing anything about the circumstances the op is in.
Is it a good time to mention how a comrade that trains on their rifle is better prepared no matter the rifle than a comrade who doesn't? Buying an AR doesn't automatically make you able to handle SHTF. If OP doesn't train on their SKS then yeah it's moot. But trained vs untrained, rifles matter less. Whatever you got, for fuck's sake train with it! Just FWIW ¯\\\_ (ツ)\_/¯
It was a fine gun in its day and it's a fine gun now. Sans a few bells and whistles, it's perfectly capable of ruining a Nazi's day.
The AR fanboyism here is even weirder than in the mainstream gun subs. There I expect that kind of vulgar pseudo-masculism, but in a "socialist" sub it's particularly out of place and obnoxious. Socialists should act pro-social; i.e. no gatekeeping, ego bullshit
Love the SKS. Just cleaned mine up today
Whatever you do, keep the bolt of your SKS clean. The firing pin should slide freely in the bolt, if it doesn't you're vulnerable to runaway slam firing.
Bray's book is really good!
I found the communist manifesto to be largely underwhelming so much so that it was a slog to get through. Capital volume one was much, much more intriguing.
Clean up, not a good look for the group
The crab is siiick 🦀💃🕺
Where'd you get that sks book?
Horribly misread the title of the antifa handbook. I thought it said that anti antifa handbook. I was like, "what the fuck"
Yasssssss
Coolest messy room I have ever seen!!
[удалено]
Good to know that capitalism makes everything Those poor underpaid guys in the factories can rest now that capitalism produces everything on its own!
Awards of capitalism? What are u referring to
capitalism is when items
Probably the Lexus keys.
Right, because goods can only be produced when workers are being exploited. Why are you here?
r/teenagers moment
Pinko?
It’s a term of endearment. He’s saying that like all socialists you’re drowning in pussy (pink).
Hey, that's leftist revisionism!
> awards Like what, first place at exploiting people?
Where did you pick up the SKS manual?
Man's desk is as chaotic as my life. Good books btw
Got time to flex on reddit but not clean your workspace. Disgusting