How 'bout we agree to disagree?
Sure, lets be clear about what we are disagreeing on though
Girodin, I have seen the light. Thank you. I shall cover my AK in more accessories than the gun itself cost and take urban combat zombie meth head pirate ninja tactical operator home self anti terrorist special forces classes from one of the cooooolest instructors on the internet at once. I am pathetic for lacking room clearing and rappelling skills.
You probably ought to read post 49 again as well as the above indicates that you don't really get what I was saying either, to whit, that you need not feel compelled to do anything to your gun that you don't like and nowhere in this thread have I made a normative statement about about accessories other than to do what best serves you.
I'm not trying to be jerk, but I'll take your silence and refusal to respond throughout this thread to mean you cannot tell us why an AK would be at a functional disadvantage with an ultimak and a micro T1 aim point, or why it would be less functional with a rail and a light.
I also have a feeling about why you did not care to share how man AKs you have shot and what configurations they have been in (you know the experience upon which you are basing your assertions).
There really is no point in continuing this discussion since one side only cares to create straw man arguments based off horribly wresting (or not understanding) the others contentions. Shy of anyone stating why particular gear is or is not useful, there is not much to discuss.
I doubt that anyone here genuinely believes that an AK is always "best" for every conceivable purpose it might be called upon to fill (from conversation piece, to plinker, to combat) for every single user on the face of the planet. Even if that is what they have argued. The fact that the above is an untenable position has been stated and restated and doing so further without new evidence that such a contention might have merit is pointless.
I certainly get how condasention works. This one is done for me---
Take it that way if you like, but the fact is basic formal logic and basic arguementation) (Things like if A then B. If C then A. Therefore, if C then B and there contra positives etc) are actually something many people don't really understand. Understanding them really does help one to follow logical contentions.
It is arguably more condescending (and actually intended as such) to tell people is only one right way to equip their firearms and that if they do not do it as you see fit (despite you giving no clear reason for it outside of dogmatic belief) they are wrong, wasting their money, stupid, a mall ninja, delusional, engaging in door kicker fantasies etc etc. than to ask someone if they understand a concept that from all indication is foreign to them. Re-read the posts and I think you will see where there was genuinely a condescending attitude at work.
