M14 In Ukraine 

M-14 is no joke with the right scope, will get you at 1000 meters....

You could do one about the FN rifles that found their way into ukraine

@@Big-boi92 definitely near the top of my list!

I'm very happy to see your successful view counts, hopefully you get the attention you deserve.

@@TheArmourersBench My first rifle in the USMC in 1973. Still used at Boot Camp and rifle range. I was expert with it 248 out of 250, shoot the eyes out of a snake at 500 yards. Then I was issued an M16 A1... Made a great hose but you sure weren't going to reach out and touch anyone with it. I notice no 16 platformed weapons out there... I loved how US forces had to bring them out of storage for Iraq and Afghanistan as their POS 16's/M4's sucked for air beyond about 200 yards...

The M14 is a shit rifle.

There’s something real special about a 7.62x51 out of a 16in barrel 🤙 more compact and a booty smacker out to 500yds when I’d not like to take shots past 250yds with my 5.56. The whole 1000yd range of a .308 just isn’t realistic, using it in a real world way the 7.62NATO round is an awesome DMR rifle caliber no matter what semi auto platform you use to sling em.

I'd say that it has some very powerful energy about it

@@0baddawa0 Is that based on your vast knowledge and experience of using it in combat?

@@MrDeplorable-sw9cz no, it's based on the numerous books, ordnance reports, SDM training (thw only reason M14s were issued in the role during the Early Gwot was they were cheap and available; they also were all worked over by armors, and mostly given new stocks, because everytime you remove the action from a polymer or wood stock, if doesn't seat in exactly the same spot without a fuck ton of acraglass, or inlet metal blocks), gunsmith training, and building service rifles for competition, the main point for most M14 variants in America, combined with 3 combat tours and experience in using the rifle on the clock. It doesn't hold zero. Wooden furniture can and does swell to the point of locking the gun up. They had a history of rusting close overnight in ambush positions. The open top receiver sucks in dirt and debris, and locks up. It is longer, heavier, and less accurate than its contemporaries. The Ammo and mags are heavier (and I routinely hike with full kit of 12 loaded 7.62 in my belt), and mags more prone to bungling the insertion under stress due to the rock and lock nub missing the catch. The ordnance department had more reports of failures in Vietnam of the M14 in its short service there, than the M16. You can do all this research on your own. The M14 is mythologized because the ignorant think it's an upgraded M1- it isn't. It's the love child of an thalidomide M1 and the best retardation the ordnance department could produce. They see the pics of early Vietnam, and get nostalgic for the romantic idea of what it was then. They've never had to patrol 8 klicks through the woods with an M14- shit, most of them have never humped the gun and more than 3 mags from the car to the bench. When you get down to it, it's a shit rifle for grunt work. Any rifle is better than none, but there is no reason to jerk off the Ordnance Department's biggest blunder that actually, factually, no shit got men killed by being a shit rifle in the field.

ahhh No Russia is not the USSR no mater what the propaganda claims , and this is not about saving the world from communism the Russian Communists are a group of quaint old men who stick to managing Russia's social programs and are happy that they have a real economy to draw from....this is 2022 not 1960 the Russians are rocking weapons that just came out of production and full kits including body armor while the Ukrainians are fielding their 5th stringers with no training and expecting them to fight with weapons made before they were even born.

Every M14 over there,if it was sentient would be saying "Our day has come!"

@@doughesson Especially with the Army adopting the M5 in a battle rifle cartridge, the M14 would say "Gee, its almost like you've come full circle huh?!" LOL.

It was envisioned by rear echelon geezers in the Ord Dept whose heads were stuck in 1918.

@@LuvBorderCollies well at least it looks better than Mondern rifles gotta give it that

Isn't the M21 a Serbian AK variant?

@@zanesmith7727 it is also a M14 variant

@@zanesmith7727 It's the DMR variant of the M14 (M14NM to be technical).

Good to know

I'm guessing scoped M14s may have the full auto selector while M21s don't?

yes they are, with scope and just ball ammo easy hits to 600 yards

Unfortunately it's turned into an artillerymans' war:( and the M14 is probably too much gun. This is the same theater of operation that lead the Germans to deploy an intermediate cartridge rifle in the first place.

@@evancourtney7746 it depends what part of the UKraine you are fighting in.. UKraine grows a lot of wheat.. America grows a lot of wheat too.. get a look at battle distance in Kansas… I am not saying they need rifle squads with these rifles.. I am saying that if you are a rifleman seeing enemies at 400 yards and a bit it is nice to have a rifle that will send rounds out accurately that will penetrate body armor.

not really considering that the m14 sucks

@@ishitrealbad3039 It sucks for jungle warfare. On open plains, it's superior.

4 clicks up at 200 yards like the M1 Garand ?

Not sure what you mean by "know how to use them"? Outside of being completely incompetent with a rifle they are very easy to use and become competent with esp. if you have ANY experience shooting (say plinking with .22). The M1 & M14 are generally designed for a farmboy to be able to pickup and kill the enemy. Gun nerds will get into complicated MOA discussions and talk about best firearms for various circumstances, but in the end there still seems to be a place for a "full battle rifle" in the field. The overall design of this rifle, with it's big cartridge and iron sites is timeless. Very approachable and effective in it's basic form. 👍

@@squig808 Thanks for the reply. Not everyone really knows how estimate wind, range and make effective adjustments to sights that are adjustable for both windage and elevation, particularly for targets that might be significantly greater or lesser elevation than you are.

Agree 100%. The stock M14 is an excellent weapon. Its range is really limited more by the limitations of human vision than by the capabilities of the rifle and its round. Its ability to hit hard at long range makes it a great weapon for some of the longer-range engagements that we have seen in Ukraine (which has a lot of large, open fields). The 7.62x51 should also punch through most of the Russian body armor we have seen fielded thus far. Another major advantage is that it is pretty easy to strip and clean, which is important for troops in intensive combat in muddy conditions.

You can reach out farther than 500. The problem is how far can you see.

Yup.

It is a great rifle but not when time comes to clean it. I'd pick the AR10 over the M14 for the ease of breaking down and cleaning.

All sniper rifles in the U.S. army,are no longer used in favor of the new Barrett Mrad rifle,it's considered the best sniper rifle ever.

Both the M14 and its ammo are lighter than the preceding rifle, the M1.

So did some of my friends, Some units didn't transfer to the M16 until the late years of Vietnam

Without a skilled armorer to keep it accurate, those M14s won't be useful at range for long.

As someone's described the M1 Garand,the M14 weighs just enough.

The same complaint was leveled at the M1 rifle until it was time to fight. When the enemy was in sight all the men was happy to have it!

The M1 Garand is a close 2nd place.

It's difficult to find 7,62 NATO AP rounds,but there's plently of normal 7,62

If it's 7.62 NATO you can use 308 rifle ammunition

Not really. The 7.62 NATO cartridge is the premier medium machine gun ammo in the world (yes, the Russians still use the antique 7.62 Rimmed (adopted in 1891!)

Most Infantry combat in Ukraine is still falling into the 300 meter range, which negates pretty much all the perceived benefits of a 7.62 battle rifle, and amplifies it's faults.

@@0baddawa0 7.62 is a devastating round.

Aw come one, "quite heavy"? Really you must be what, late teens or early twenties in age? Probably strong as an ox.

Quite heavy? Heavier than it should be, yes, because of the stupid barrel profile, but still lighter than most of the alternatives on the market

M4 and M14 are two different guns.

I believe you have an M-14 they are much heavier tan an M-4 !!! Probably a spelling error at the worst place !

My father had to train with the M-14. I have no idea why he didn't get issued the M-16A1 as it did exist at the time of his stay in boot camp. (Were M-16s immediately rushed to the battlefield, leaving very few for new recruits?) He said it kicked HARD but at least you knew the bad guy absolutely would not be getting up if you got a solid hit.

THIS IS MY RIFLE , THERE ARE MANY LIKE IT BUT THIS ONE IS MINE ????? DEVIL DOG LEATHERNECK MARKSMANSHIP , A MARINE WITH HIS " WEAPON " , SCORING HITS WHEN THEY COUNT .

Thank you!

Absolutely Peter it will reach out and touch something.

M-14 or M1A?

2022 and going Strong.

No, it's not. That's why they aren't issued anymore. Even the worked over M21 weren't sub MOA, averaging 1.6 MOA, IIRC.

@@0baddawa0 LMAO! 1.6 MOA is pretty good. Most combat shots are minute of man, hitting center mass. Even a sub moa rifle at 500 yards is making 5 MOA for it to be a 1 MOA at that distance. For example, on the Armory Life YT channel they got a 6.5 Creedmoor M1A to achieve 8 MOA at 1000 yards. 1 MOA at 1000 yards is 10 MOA. They got it to group 8 MOA meaning it was well under 1 MOA at 1000.

@@pliskenx51mm83 and you, like so many others in this thread, are comparing a civilian maintained rifle to a military issue one, and that's not even the same ballpark.

@@0baddawa0 LOL! So? Are you implying the military with state of the art training isn't able to keep up and maintain weapons in its inventory? Is that why the Army is switching over to the M5 now and dumping the M4. The M4 can't be kept maintained properly? XD.

Yes, you have! Yeah those crazy thumbhole ones that have fat forends. I know the ones you mean.

I have a Lee Enfield that was apparently restocked during WWII in Australia because the stock is some kind of heavy jungle wood - it sure isn't walnut !!! That's what I like about it.

Thank you! Thanks for watching.

Yeah, E/2/1, 1st Mar. Div. Sure preferred the M-14, especially in the field.

As a replacement for a main battle rifle, auto rifle, light machine gun and sub machine gun because that's what it was supposed to do according to the ordinance department

@@Scrap_Goblin No. The ultimate mission - as designed in the 1950s - was killing Russians. The categorical designation ultimately doesn't matter at the receiving end. The Russian is being shot by an American weapon.

@@Scrap_Goblin and sucked for all of those

Protecting NAZIS?

@@shoelessbandit1581 well since it replaced the garand as the main battle rifle I would say it was a major step up from that. Also at the time the only auto rifle in service was the BAR it was also a step up from that in that it spread auto fire through the military exponentially .. I love the garand by the way..

для этого есть svd

ogre lg don’t know what you said other than “svd”, but I think that’s enough to nonetheless say, sure but the M14 is as good a DMR as the svd so if they can’t get an svd for whatever reason, changing to scarcer ammo is better than using like a mosin or something worse.

@@ogrelg4131 the SVD is mainly made in china with their NDM rifles, and the Russians, neither want to sell it.

Yes, it makes sense to give svd to those who want to kill more americans on their territory. It will be fair.

It’s shit

Absolutely on the list. I may do a video looking at the various 5.56 rifles that have been in use.

We (the U.S.) still had them in service in Iraq in 2005.

Coming from a civilian who was never in any kind of military, I wouldn’t have guessed, I just thought it was for drill and training after the 80s

@@tim7325 they never got rid of the because they're a reliable accurate hard hitting rifle with decent range, but they just weren't standard issue once the m16 was standsrdized.

@@TylerSnyder305 Agreed, we had 2 M14's in our company armsroom for the two people that wanted them. I carried an M16A2 in it's original configuration. I did have the opportunity to shoot the M14 on the range, fine rifle.

Thanks Matt!

Also didn't know but i'm not surprised. Very simple rifle, cheap, easy to maintain, fires a mighty round. A logical choice

@@doktork3406 dam right…you get hit one of these…you won’t be complaining…”i’m not satisfied with that… could you send it again please”…..no no no ….you will be satisfied first time out…GUARANTEED !!

I was in Nam '66-'67, the M-14 was never a problem in deep brush/jungle, it worked 24/7, not like the Matty Matel specials they gave us in the Spring of '67, which were pieces of crap.

@@boondocker7964 Hey man, first of all thanks for your service. Also I heard the wood on the M14s swelled up in the heat and climate and was just a bit too heavy and long for Vietnams terrain? I for one would have always picked that over the M16 personally but would like to know your thoughts/experience with them 😁

@@TheGreyWolf94 The M-14, I had from July '66 till about Feb. '67, did not swell up all through the Monsoon of Nov-Dec. '66, it was slightly heavy, all rifles are "heavy", but, not to the point of it being a hindrance of some sort. Don't forget, we were young bucks, under 20 years of age, not old men of 75 years, even in dense brush/jungle, if you will, it was not an onerous piece of equipment, rifle, six mags, at least one bandoleer, pack, two canteens, E-tool, claymore, 3-4 M-26's, C's, AND a flack jacket to keep you warm, sometimes they would have you carry a 60 MM round for the mortar crew, each guy in the platoon would get a mortar round to hump, not every operation, but, just another piece of crap, at least it wasn't an 81 round.

@@boondocker7964 Wow, that's really great stuff to know. Thank you so much for sharing your experience with the rifle and being in 'Nam in general. Again, thanks for your service, take care of yourself and god bless, sir.

@@TheGreyWolf94 Mine had a fiberglass stock -- but that was in the late 1980's.

@ Joe Suasville - I have heard the same sort of comments praising the M-14 from some Vietnam veterans I once knew. I was too young to go to that particular round-up (I turned fourteen in 1975), but I knew a half-dozen or so Army and Marine Corps combat veterans of that conflict (plus one Navy Corpsman attached to the Marines), and to a man, those guys praised the M-14 and hated the M-16 which replaced it. Lots of smack gets tossed around on the internet about the M-14, but if the guys who were there and carried them into battle thought highly of the rifle, then that trumps anything some rear-area pogue thinks.

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 My cousin was a Marine in Vietnam and told me the M14 - while heavy, was valued in a squad as it was able the shoot through tree trunks from which the VC were firing behind while the M16's just wouldn't penetrate. It also had greater range when needed.

My brother carried one one in Viet Nam , he always talked very well of it , I missed the last draft by 7 months,

Ditto for me, RVN '66-'67.

Someone's been reading too many bad novels and thinking they're reality.

@@wlewisiii Someone's been watching too many RU-vid videos and thinking its reality.

Please calm down.

Yea, YOU.

Andrii, that's a really interesting point you make about the magazines. Are you guys doing without marskmans rifles or have you access to something else now?

@@TheArmourersBench We have a big shortage of Marksman rifles. Everyone regrets that they had to hand over the M14. Moreover, it was possible to install optical sights without problems. I know that individual units kept them in service, taking magazines from those kits that were handed over to the warehouse. Unfortunately we didn't get anything in return. My friend is now forced to wear a Mosin-Nagant with optics in addition to the AK.

@@andriiyevdokymov6781 tha k you for your insight into the situation Andrii, if you'd be open to further discussion perhaps we could email? armourersbench@gmail.com thanks!

Do guys prefer the m-14 to the SVD?

@@Eggomania86 Due to the lack of SVD.

You hated having a bullet launcher that worked 24/7, and could reach out and touch a target at 500+ yards?

In the jungle long range wasn’t an issue ,rice paddies a whole different issue however

Our "point man" would use a .12ga w/ .00 buck because the .223 round would get deflected by the brush ~ NO deflection with the "Brush Cutter" !!

@@williampfaffjr7684 exactly

Currently compiling evidence of 5.56 rifles in use so they'll definitely be mentioned!

@@TheArmourersBench Cool. If you need help, let me know! I watch pretty much every piece of video on the conflict I can find. I've seen a lot of volunteers with Scars especially.

@@darklyripley6138 Absolutely, any help is very much welcome. If you spot anything cool drop me a line at armourersbench@gmail.com :)

lmfao, the m14 is less reliable than an AR.

@@ishitrealbad3039 You know literally nothing.

@@ishitrealbad3039 Are you drawing that conclusion based on real world experiences, or video games and Google?

Shenmi, you brought up the most overlooked design advantage the M14 has over any of its peers. The bolt bearing dramatically increases functional reliability. It also lends itself for clearing malfunctions much faster if needed. There's an advantage with having only two exposed locking lugs. The recesses in the receiver are easily accessed, and can be cleaned or cleared fast. The other advantage is having direct override manipulation over the bolt via the oprod. I agree 100%, as far as iron sights, there's no equal. Their intuitive and easy to manipulate.

that and it's weight absorbs recoil, and makes it a good club if the russians get too close.

As a general question, do you remember what markings were on the receiver, if it was just the "M14NM" markings, or did it have unique "M21" markings?

Sorry no. Do know it was refered to as an M21 system and we (sniper buddy and I) went thru at least 6 different Art 1 and 2 scopes mostly because of oil spots inside on lenses I think. Scopes really sucked. 1985 was long time ago for me. lol@@Afterconflict

@@danielwarnes7231 Interesting info, and how reliable was the automatic range adjustment? Also, another question, what was your go-to method of storing magazines, I've seen photos of ALICE M16 pouches being used by M21 users (likely with the magazines crammed in), but I've also seen mentions of the older M-1956 pouches being used.

@@Afterconflict Storing magazines was the standard H harness we wore in 1985 with the 4 magazine capacity pouches on your web belt. Wore a butt pack that I carried a box of 100 rounds in also. Have no idea what you mean by automatic range adjustment. We used the two types of scopes. They had different reticles in them. Don't remember which was which. Money was so tight that we could not get new scopes. Just old rebuilt ones. Think I went thru 6 while in the course. Sorry not better info, 30 plus years and I'm old now so maybe memory failure, but really have no Idea about the range question. We applied what we called bust on target to adjust shots normally. You observed where the round hit in relation to the target and the reticle, then moved that point onto the target. Was very effective for fast adjustment. Not like calling the mils and then clicks on the sight. That is good for range fire or target shooting. But in a rapid fire situation it is worthless. The M21 of course was semi auto. This actually came in handy when you needed to take out or suppress multiple targets quickly. I the recent wars Iraq and Afghanistan it was obviously much different than the terrain and situations I worked in. I rarely had over 300 yards of sight line visibility. I never fired a shot over 600 yards myself. No laser range finders and only field techniques like smoke, flags or tree movement to estimate wind. I'm just being petty, but when I watched videos of "sniper hides" with tables, sandbags, cases of bottled water and chairs I just don't have as much admiration for the "sniper". Shooting is the easy part in my day. Field craft is what got you in and back out. Not sitting secure and shooting lame targets. The sights are so much better now. Exact ranges and auto adjust for wind, temp and humidity! Carlos Hathcock these guys are not (but then neither was I). Army didn't even have a sniper school when I was in SF. Glad they at least fixed that. I was no steller example of a sniper. But I did help my team with my skills, just as each of them contributed too.

springfield makes a real nice copy...walnut stock & all...M1A...only in semi auto of course...

An Ukrainian government official showed his Kel Tec Sub 2000 on a TV interview. This conflict is a treasure trove because almost any weapon can be "clone correct".

Just because something is obsolete, does not mean it is useless or without value. If you have no weapon, a nagant revolver is an upgrade. Good command can find use for anything. I'd like to know how many black tips have migrated towards the conflict. If so data from the conflict may provide some validity to the US Army's integration of the new Sig.

The word you're looking for is obsolescent.

It never was obsolete, they just tried to make us think it was.

If you paid 3000 then you got ripped off. Also it was always a decent rifle, just was not fit for its original intended role. Ofc now there are better options for marksman rifles but it is still a good rifle in that regard.

No problem, thanks for watching.

Russian Armor is dogshit too. So they aren't stopping 7.62x51mm at all.

An armed society is a polite society, Robert Heinlein.

Thanks for the thumb's up

@@VulcanGunner No problem Brad, it is a great saying. I believe that the more people that are educated on guns and what they can and can't do, the better. It is always fear of that which people don't understand that causes freedoms to be taken away. I have been shooting guns since I was 5 and my experience helped me develop a healthy amount of both fear and respect for weapons of all kinds. I love that quote, and I am a History addict, I have studied the past of gun control in America and by dictators from Hitler to Stalin. Always keep learning and have Faith. I don't know if you're religious, but these are times that look like something out of the bible. Stay safe out there, All the best.

@@justinwaters8679 Hello Justin, I spent twenty years in the Army and in 1983 I went to Berlin. When we passed into East Germany on board the train it looked like some turned off the lights. I could see the silhouettes of buildings and houses but very few lights. Then, it lit up again as we approached West Berlin. West Berlin was modern, clean, great people, food was fantastic and I drank quite a bit of beer. Check Point Charlie, the Escape Museum and several memorials were visited over a couple of days. One day were were transported into East Berlin, wow what a difference. At this point I had spent almost a year and a half in West Germany and I never saw such a clean country (you could not see any war damage from WW2). East Berlin was sad, it looked old and tired and people seemed to always be on guard. They were nothing like the Germans I met from the West and this is not a knock on East Germans at all, they just looked scared to me. Most of east Berlin looked like a set from post-apocalypse movie. Looks like communism had failed hard to take care of it's own people. Oh Justin, may I say hello from The People's Republic of Cook County, Illinois. Respectively, Brad Riley SSG, US Army Retired

@@VulcanGunner Salute to you, Mr. Riley. Your experience over 20 years, especially in East-Germany reminded me of the aerial view of north and south Korea from space at night. The South is well- lit and bright, while the north only has spots of light coming from Pyongyang and the port of Wonsan. This is an image that demonstrates the picture you have just painted about the former GDR. I despise communism and totalitarianism in general, and that is one huge reason why. The economic disparity between the free south and the communist north is all anyone should have to see to prove that totalitarianism creates a hell- on- earth scenario for those trying to live. Korea is much like East Germany, where the darkness and shadows you described during your service still persist in the north. The lack of enthusiasm and motivation had to be because of the Stasi, as I am sure that you know that they kept records on everything every GDR citizen ever did in life, and they were not afraid to lock people away for any form of dissent. It is sad what FDR allowed at the Yalta conference, when he basically handed all of central and eastern Europe over to Stalin on a silver platter. The Yalta conference betrayed the partisans of eastern Europe and the normal citizens, when Hitler and Stalin were just as responsible for the simultaneous invasion of Poland and the following declarations of war. I would have liked to see what gen. Patton wanted to do, Patton wanted to remobilize the remaining Wehrmacht along with allied and American soldiers to attack Russia and take Stalin out to ensure the freedom of all of Europe for good. Strange that he ended up being relieved of duty and happened to die in a car "accident" soon after. The Soviets surely had the motive, as Patton was Communist Russia's biggest threat in the days following WW2. Communism always fails hard, and it does so at a great expense to human life. The great- leap forward aka the great- leap off- a- cliff is a prime example. I am glad you are educated on this, because my generation (I'm 32) are taught almost nothing on the evil and genocide by communist regimes, all they hear about is WW2 and Hitler, not Stalin, who is the other side of the same coin as Hitler, wish they had both got taken out. I send Prayers from the Peoples Republik auf Komifornia, I love being a Conservative Christian white- male, because that is the only way to be a "rebel" here in the Kali Reich, and I love to surprise people. There are still a few sane men left in Kali. God Bless and thank you for your career of service, it seems you have paid your dues to your Nation in spades, and that is to be Respected. With all due reverence and respect, All the best to you and I salute you for your service. God Bless you Mr. Riley.

The M14 was only really supposed to be fired on full-auto with a bipod deployed.

I've seen at least one with the F/A switch. Its possible it might have been welded inside the receiver to keep it semi auto.

@@daneaxe6465 This was only done on M14NM rifles as part of the conversion to National Match standards, most have the standard selector locks intact.

ok boomer

They are!

Not an up grade

@@curtislarson1487 Absolutely an upgrade. The Estonains called the M14 "fully terrible," and they didn't even have to pay for the rifles. They got them for free and still thought they were pieces of shit. Because they are. The M14 has always been an abomination. An AR10 will be more reliable, more durable, more accurate, more ergonomic, easier to maintain, easier to add optics to...simply better functionally in every way.

@@curtislarson1487 you’re insane if you think the modern AR-10 isn’t superior to the M14.

@@Anni3sgotagun It's not just an AR-10, it's from LMT. They do things quite well.

with the spray and pray tactics of the rookies, give it about 3 weeks and they will have logistics problems before dumping all their m14s

@@kwanchan6745 from what i have seen of fighting in the countryside spray and pray is all you have because you cant see past 50 meters

Adequate as a DMR simply because it's chambered in 7.62 NATO, not really the best due to weight and maintenance concerns... At this point though I'm sure the Ukrainians will use whatever they can get.

Lighter than an M1 ?

In north west Ukraine there are mountains and trees. In eat Ukraine there are wide open rolling fields with hedge rows . Both instances this rifle is good for. It has the range to take advantage or the fields. It also has the range to take advantage of the hills in western Ukraine.

The old geezers at US Army Ordnance were still fighting the Napoleonic wars and shooting competition at Camp Perry. Best thing McNamara did was to get rid of those clowns.

3/4 mile is 1320 yards. 1320 yards is not 731 meters.

Depends on the size of the shooter.

Off topic but I met an OV 10 pilot who flew in Vietnam. He shot an elephant with a 2.75 inch rocket. The VC used them for transporting weapons.

Right

Thanks Carl!

Sure. I have seen lots of videos in Russian hands. Meaning. All those Nazis are dead 😂😂

@@havanascp9602 Take your meds, commie. If they're not sanctioned in St. Petersburg.