How not to buy an AK-47

Someone has wrote an article in Mo Jo, using the Republican's playbook.

You know that their is some Rethug slant coming in a story when the reporter calls making a gun COMPLY with the law as "getting around the law."

So, Mr. Falconer, when I replace my overly noisy muffler to make sure
that my car is in compliance with Virginia law, all I am really doing
is just "getting around the law"?

Not to mention, this article is so riddled with misleading statements, it would even make that Rethug Sara Brady blush with shame. (well, that is doubtful, she has no shame)

Words mean something and Mr. Falconer knows it. Mr. Falconer evidently gets his marching orders from the Brady Campain, and their republican leadership.

It is kinda of humorous, as he goes thru with his "spiel" about how EASY it is to just buy an AK-47, he almost failed to point out that HE, was unable to purchase one.. LOL!

Also, I wish I could find the venerable SKS for $89 bucks...I would wipe them out!

http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2008/07/outfront-bush-to-cops-drop-dead.html

it seemed a bit lame. I mean really who can't go to any gun store across the US and purchase an AK or similar type rifle. He makes it seem as it is some nefarious underground type of activity.

the $89 SKS is as common as $1.50/gallon gasoline.
Let's find more errors, don't have to look far.

"...to hunting rifles, but I was in the market for something with a bit more firepower....a variation of the Russian AK-47"
Well then you should have stopped at the hunting rifles if you wanted more firepower.

"It's the same gun," the dealer told me,"
Well then either he's a liar or you're a sucker, Bruce. Probably both. Yeah the exact same, minus automatic fire.

When you spot that much horseshit in the first half of the first paragraph there's really no need to read further.

Someone in the Guns forum of DU objecting to things said in an article in one of the most progressive publications in the US.

I get Mother Jones in my mailbox. Hadn't got around to this one yet.

I love the comments.

"Typical PSH liberal BS, tainted, lies and fiction."

Yes, that one's obviously from a regular reader of Mother Jones.

Yes, the well-watered astroturf.

poorly written article by someone who clearly either doesn't understand anything about the rifle he attempted to purchase or intentionally wrote his article in an untruthful, yet more sensational way is wrong because the magazine it was published in happens to be progressive? I'm sorry but I must have missed the piece of indoctrination class where we learned that political affiliation of the parent publication grants an automatic bye for anything written by one of its staffers. A shitty article is a shitty article, no matter how spot-on the rest of the publication, in this case mother jones, is.

If the NRA were to publish an article praising a state for protecting the anonymity of young women needing abortions would you continue to scream about what vile pigs they are, totally ignoring the actual content of the article?

If so, kindly explain why.

If not, what exactly are you yapping about, eh?

"It's deeply saddening that someone would consider his/her opinions about an important public policy issue to be worth spewing in public when s/he is so totally ignorant of the subject matter, and so deeply uninterested in learning the minimum necessary to have an opinion of even minimal value."

You said that. Would you hold the writer of the piece in question to any less of a standard?

It is a sad day for me when a magazine that I really enjoy and share with others has printed this utter POS article. It makes me question other things I read in the magazine. If they can be so sloppy and wrong in one article, how can I trust their editorial control and reporting on other matters?

Are we to assume that guns is their one weak point?

An accusation of lese majeste, an Appeal to Authority, *and* a Genetic Fallacy.
All in six sentences. What an economy of style!

Just wow. That article is a hoot. No idea how the author did it, just couldn't make that stuff up if you tried.

Obviously the fact checkers were let go during a previous budget cut. I cannot speak about the rest of the magazine, but the editors should be embarrassed that this article went to press.

You've been spun by the repubs at the Brady Campaign, and badly.

(1) All rifles COMBINED, including all SKS's, civilian AK lookalikes, AR-15's, hunting rifles, .22's---ALL of them---account for less than 3% of murders annually, per the FBI.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_20.html

Two point nine one percent. For all rifles put together. That is less than half as many people as are murdered with shoes and bare hands, for pete's sake. This is the same type of baseless scaremongering that the Bush administration pulls regularly when it plays the "Terrah!" card. We are better than that.

(2) SKS's and civilian AK lookalikes do indeed define one end of the rifle power spectrum---the LOW end. They are among the least powerful centerfire rifles on the market.

http://www.tribtalk.com/showthread.php?t=16466

7.62x39mm (.30 Russian Short): 1,495 ft-lb kinetic energy
.30-30 Winchester (1800's vintage): 1,902 ft-lb
.243 Winchester (small deer rifle): 1,946 ft-lb
.30-06 (most popular deer rifle): 2,900 ft-lb
.375 Holland & Holland: 4,230 ft-lb
.416 Remington Magnum: 5,115 ft-lb
.585 Nyati: 10,130 ft-lb
.700 Nitro Express: 11,150 ft-lb
.50 BMG: 13,971 ft-lb

Don't take my word for it, LOOK IT UP. I suggest the Ballistics page at Remington.com for starters.

(3) The 1994 Feinstein law didn't ban any guns, didn't restrict AK or AR-15 magazines, and didn't require civilian AK's to have 19th-century style stocks. What it did was to require post-'94 civilian AK's to have smooth muzzles or pin-on brakes instead of screw-on brakes. Point of fact, far more civilian AK's were sold in 1994 and shortly after than in the previous decade combined.

Here's what the idiotic 1994 Feinstein law did:



Were those minor cosmetic changes (which only cognoscenti would even notice) REALLY worth twelve years of repub rule? I didn't think so.

(4) Your perception of gun-owner demographics is stuck in the 1950's. More Americans lawfully and responsibly own "assault weapons" than hunt; the SKS is by all accounts the most popular centerfire rifle in U.S. homes, bar none; and the AR-15 dominates competitive and recreational centerfire target shooting in the United States and is the most popular civilian defensive carbine in this country. You'd have less of a backlash at the polls if you tried to outlaw hunting.

(5) Fully half of U.S. gun owners are DEMS AND INDIES, but you'd never know it from the mainstream progressive press. Progressives own guns in this country---including many that the repubs at the Brady Campaign wish to ban---and we're keeping them, modern styling and all.

(6) The "Dems'll-take-yer-guns" meme is FINALLY dead, after Howard Dean successfully got gun bans dropped from the agenda in '06. Let's let it STAY dead, please.

Reanimating the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch doesn't do a THING about criminal gun violence, and helps no one but the repubs.

Point number three, especially. I never saw it that way!

That's my rifle, BTW, lying on my 1978-esque kitchen floor. :D

I've gotten a little better at composition since, I hope:



(Competition and HD configuration, with an optic and shorter magazine.)

What is the capacity on this magazine anyway? Also, is this a Bulgarian/Romanian version? I always find myself weighing the AK and SKS (SKS being cheaper and striker clip compatible). But I always tell myself to go the extra mile and find an AK-74(semi), I know the ammo will cost more, but the muzzle compensator is wonderful on the 74.

thanks =]

which is about the same length as a 30-round AR-15 mag. In a crisis situation, I'd prefer 30's, but the 20's are lighter and handier for most uses, and that's what I normally load it with. When I shoot IPSC style rifle matches, I use the 20's for most stages, and 30's only on the really long stages.

That's a Romanian SAR-1 (7.62x39mm) carbine, BTW, a civilian derivative of the Romanian version of the AKM-47. The optic is a Russian gen-2 Kobra (EKP-8-02).

You can still find SAR-2's (5.45x39mm, civilian AK-74 derivative) out there, and they are reportedly fine rifles for the money. Fit and finish will be nicer on something like an Arsenal or Krebs, but the SAR's function fine. If you do get a 5.45, though, I'd suggest buying at least a couple cases of ammunition; it is relatively cheap right now, but if importation is ever cut off, you'd be screwed. The 5.45's are reportedly more accurate than the 7.62's.

My dream AK would be one of the civilian AK-101 derivatives (5.56x45mm, aka .223 Remington). A converted Saiga comes close, and I think Krebs or Arsenal make some, but they are close to $1000 (egads).

Regarding the SKS, they are fine rifles as long as you don't ever want to put optics on it. If you do, a Saiga (straight-stocked AK variant) would probably be a better choice, and they are about the same price as a good SKS these days; unlike the SKS, the Saiga comes with the standard eastern-bloc optics rail on the left side of the receiver, allowing you to mount all manner of Eastern European optics (Kobra, POSP, PK-AS, etc.). You can have a gunsmith drill and tap an SKS receiver for an optics rail, but other than that there aren't many good options for SKS optics unless you want a 1x dot on a gas tube mount. My wife has a Russian SKS with a receiver-cover mount, and it shoots well but loses zero when the cover is removed to clean the rifle.

My ideal assault rifle would be a later model AK (either 47/74) with a skeleton stock ala. the SVD. I like the look and user friendly scope of the SVD but I can't find a real Soviet version for under $1000, I mean there's Romanian copies which actually are Kalashnikov receivers that chamber a 7.62x54R, but those don't have the same look or feel. But an AK with the same set up would be OK. I think that as far as optical course shooting goes the Kalashnikov is accurate enough, and a scope rail would probably be a must have.

Thanks for the feed back. =]

Miami police chief John Timoney described how AK-47s have become the weapon of choice among violent criminals in his city. "Two or three years ago, we had the lowest homicide rate since 1967 in Miami," he said. "Then the homicides skyrocketed with the availability of AK-47s. And it went from 3 percent of all homicides being committed with AKs, up to 9 percent two years ago, then 18 percent last year, and this year it is around 20 percent. And it's going up...We're being flooded with these AK-47s."

I believe he is saying that 20% of homicides in Miami are being committed with AK-47's. I'll have to look into that.


David

and given that Timoney has a history of exaggeration on the rifle crime issue, color me very skeptical indeed.

Panel: Chief Timoney Violated Rules Over SUV
Timoney Has Previously Been Fined For Breaking State And County Ethics Laws

http://cbs4.com/local/John.Timoney.civilian.2.772833.html

Yep, he's a real honest guy.

David

I suspect that Timoney's AK-owner-bashing is in part an attempt to make himself look good in the national media. He's been the subject of probably 20 or 30 "AK menace" stories over the past year or two, which suggests that he is working a whole lot of gun-404 reporters very aggressively.