Brew78 is right for removing the second statement but for the wrong reasons The statement should have been removed until it can be sourced using a neutral academic source perhaps impossible to find on a topic like this I was merely stating what appeared to be a well known fact If most citizens of countries around the world were polled using standard techniques they would oppose civilian ownership of AK 47 s and their variants I was not saying that global public opinion on this point is right or wrong I was not saying why they have that perception Given that even media in the United States let alone worldwide tends to be biased against civilian gun ownership it would be a wonder if the public thought any differently I included what I considered to be a stipulated fact I personally do not regard world opinion as of any value whatsoever in forming the domestic and in most cases foreign policy of the United States of America I merely wanted to illuminate the social and political context of the ownership of these weapons and in part explain why ownership of these civilian variants is comparatively rare outside of the United States of America Instead I created the appearance of political bias I should have remembered that some other readers find international standards and opinion to be very relevant to domestic law Thus the second statement could be perceived as making a political argument in favor of prohibiting these weapons What I should have done is simply note that most countries around the world prohibit or heavily restict ownership of these kinds of weapons but that they are legal in most states in the United States which means that the ownership of civilian Kalashnikov variants is largely restricted to the United States That would have provided the correct political and social background could have easily been sourced and would have avoided making an unsupported statement easily misinterpreted as politically favoring one side or the other through no fault of the reader