What gun is most associated with Freedom and Liberty?
pic unrelated
Pennsylvania or Kentucky long rifle
Ayy are fif-deen.
>>28087225
For anything but US, the AK is THE gun that symbolizes Freedom and Liberty.
>>28087270
this
honorable mentions
FAL
AK
garand maybe
>>28087293
This. The damn thing is on at least three flags.
>>28087293
The /k/ountry.
>>28087270
/thread
>>28087293
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAHXosoNlvo
I don't think the AK-47 should symbolize freedom. In countries where it's on the flags and shit it was just given to them to fight a proxy war. Being a pawn in the USSR's proxy war doesn't sound very free to me. Also those are countries with a history of ethnic cleansings since the rifle has been introduced.
If I had to pick another weapon besides the PA Long Rifle I'd say The Garand or the FAL.
>>28087322
It's on literally one flag. And that country is a communist toilet
>>28087293
LOL. The AK-47 is the symbol of terrorism, dictatorship and oppression. Soviet Union. Communist China. Communist North Korea. Communist / Rebellious African nations.
The AK47 is the opposite of freedom and liberty. If you would ask me, the rifle that symbolizes freedom and liberty the most is the M1 Garand or the Lee Enfield, since those where the main battle rifles of the allies, freeing Europe from nazi occupation.
>>28087369
The movie itself was pretty interesting and entertaining, but ultimately was anti-funs if I remember correctly.
>>28087520
Look at Europe now. Ever think the Nazis were the good guys desperately trying to save Europa?
>>28087535
It wasn't necessary ani guns, it may have had some anti gun undertones... but it managed to remain pretty neutral. If anything it was anti illegal arms trading.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTK8torOylM
>>28087225
the mini cannon on the left side
>>28087542
no, because they never removed kebab
>>28087306
>AK
>commie rifle
Subtlety trolling?
>>28087293
>>28087520
The ak is the weapon most associated with revolution, not freedom.
All revolutions in the past 200 years that I can think of resulted in a decrease of freedom.
>>28087542
There is no ''ever'' or ''if''. Nazi's lost because their ideology is a failure. Their only thrived econimcally throughout the first years because of gigantic war preperations and outside money influence. Nazi leadership was like a wild pack of wolves which all wanted to be at the top and would even assassinate each other if it came to that. Even if won, their system and society were doomed to fail and collapse. Longing back to nazism is nothing but a pathetic scapegoat used by unsuccessful beta's to put blame on the current status quo and their shitty position on the social ladder in society., which is most of /pol/.
>>28087542
>>28087588
in case you're hard of sight or reading
>>28087335
>>28087293
Yeah, this. Surprised it was even mentioned on a board filled with clapistanian jingoists, good job.
>>28087626
The nazis lost because they had limited resources. They simply were too ambitious, if they hadn't tried to take over europe in less than a decade, then they would have been fine.
Best case scenario alternate history scenario:
After having captured france they called it quits and meant it, hitler gave the power back, the commie jews were all dead and the senate then desocialized the nation, removed the anti-jew laws, and allied with america.
In the end the french are gone, europe is more simple, and america has a cooler friend.
If you see a soldier with one of these, you know it's one of the good guys.