Dozens of AK-47 rifles stolen from CA Army base

Source: Raw Story

Officials are offering a $10,000 reward for information about the plundering, which occurred July 15 but was only disclosed to the media late this week. An undisclosed number of arrests have been made, and one of the rifles has been recovered.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/31/dozens-of-ak-47-rifles-stolen-from-ca-army-base/

---

These are are a much newer version of the original AK47..
Hope San Bernardino LEOs and all Community have a heads up on this...

They're in Mexico by now. Punka-punka-punka.

than on the battlefront and not know what they are hearing.

Army units go to Irwin where the unit at irwin acts as the opposing force. They use a ton of Soviet/Russian equipment.

A self-loading rifle (including machine guns like the AK-47) typically require what's called a blank firing adapter in order to fire blank cartridges. Those adapters make the rifle unable to fire real ammunition until it's disassembled and the adapter removed. Try to fire live ammo with the adapter still in place... well, let's just say it wouldn't be healthy.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS-V7CFM1sjmegPz9ggKAtp34vR5Q4INNk1thiSTlQsrlAlgDWVRQ

The AK uses a gas operating system, just like the M16, M14 and M1 Rifles. Unless someone removed the Barrels and installed Barrels that are blocked internally (Done mostly in movies to give the weapons being used the appearance of NOT firing blanks) most gas operating Rifles use Blank firing adapters like the one above. There are simply screwed into the barrel. The purpose of the Blank Firing adapter is to keep enough gas in the barrel to operate the gas system to load the next round. When Firing live ammunition this is performed by the bullet, and by the time the bullet leaves the barrel, the next round has been loaded. When Firing blanks a Gas Operating system has NOTHING to stop the gas from escaping out the barrel BEFORE the gas can operate the system. The way around this problem is simple, block the barrel, that keeps the gas in the barrel till the gas operating system loads the next blank. The above adapter will do that for any gas operating system.

My point is there is NO need to disassemble any gas operating Rifle (including the AK) to remove a blank firing device UNLESS the blank firing mechanism is part of the barrel. The military not only want people to see how AKs are used, but also fire them so people can see what they can do. Thus I doubt these AKs had any type of Blank Firing Device them used on the M16s, i.e. easy to remove so the AKs can also be live fired.

Surely, you can understand the benefit of being able to pick up an AK in the field and use it like it was you own.

After all, it is the weapon of choice for quite a few of the world's armed forces...not to mention nearly all of the world's so-called "evil-doers." :)

"For the record, 5:02 p.m. July 29: An earlier version of this post incorrectly identified the weapons as AK-74 rifles, based on a news release from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

The AK-74 is a Russian design rifle, too.

And I believe it uses the 5.56 round (smaller than the 47)

I fired a Czech-made AK-74 when I was in the Army & thought it was a great rifle.

as opposed to the AK47, 7.62x39mm

It shows that their fact checking is non-existent.

what it's intended to do.

The civilian part of our government is much more incompetent.

One of the primary ways they demonstrate their incompetency relates to their engaging the US in unnecessary wars.

It's easy to order people to "go get them evil-doers," when you don't have to worry about going with them.

Yes, the Military took both Countries within weeks, but most of that was conceded by the Natives of both countries from day one, the real war, the war the COUNTED, was the insurgency in both countries SINCE we took Kabul and Baghdad. How many of our Military Leaders RESIGNED over that war? None. Have we been driven out, No, have we STOPPED the Insurgency in either country by Military means? No (In Iraq we bought off the opposition AFTER they lost their local fight with the Shittes from Southern Iraq). Thus, at best, we have a Military Stalemate in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Clausewitz in his book "On War" points out that Military operations is the use of Military Force to achieve a POLITICAL Goal. What was our Political Goal AFTER the death of Saddam in Iraq or Afghanistan? If you can name it, tell me, I can NOT figure it out. And Democracy is NOT a goal, it is an idea, an idea that can NOT be imposed by Military means (Especially when the Majority of people in both Countries want the US and its allies out of both Countries). What POLITICAL GOAL is being fought for, and thus can be achieved by Military Means in either country?

This type of problem is NOT new, Clausewitz comments about it in "On WAR". When Political goals are NOT militarily achievable, the leaders of the Military MUST so tell their Political Leaders, and if the Political Leaders will not listen, resign. Thus how many military leaders resigned over either war? None, thus BOTH wars and the results of both wars, are clearly the result of the Leadership of the Army and the rest of the Military. This shows the INCOMPETENCE of such leadership.

Just because the Army and the Military can take a Country, does NOT mean you can hold it. You do NOT take a Country unless you can hold it. As a General Rule it takes three times the number of troops to hold a country as it does to take it over, thus even the plans for occupation after the initial conquest was inadequate (And this lack of Troops, is the reason the insurgency on both countries was able to form up and last this long).

Yes, our political leadership is at fault, but to exclude the Leadership of the Military from the same blame, is to ignore Clausewitz. The Generals and Admirals should have resigned rather then get tied up in either country WITHOUT enough troops. That is a Military Leadership error NOT a political error. One the Military leadership could have made clear by resigning, but none of them did for the Military leadership actually agreed with what the political Leadership wanted. Thus this is as much the fault of the Military leadership of the US, as it is the fault of the US Political Leadership.

For they are not responsible for the illegal abandonment of the Constitution's legitimate processes for declaring war.

You need to lay that blame at the feet of a cabal of Ds & Rs dressed in civilian attire.

The power to declare war was vested in the Congress to ensure a rational contemplation of the grievances, as well as the projected cost of lives and resources of the People.

Every single time the US military has been ordered into war for legitimate grievances, they have exhibited professional excellence. It's our civilian generals who have subjected our military to the random whims of the the UN, which has them engaged in three undeclared wars in the Middle East.

The American People need to ask themselves a serious questoin: Who should decide the question of whether the US initiates a state of war against another sovereign nation that has not attacked us?

Have we authorized the UN to decide what issues justify the sacrifice of our sons, daughters and assets?

Or should we abide by the Constitution which delegates this decision to the American People's representatives?

:nuke:

It was later switched to AK-47's.

Is my first guess, but by whom. Is it someone acting out on their 2nd Amendment solution? Most of these places are double locked and require 2 different people with keys to get inside. The Army has to know who had possession of the keys so why don't we already have arrests?

Don't be surprised if you see these weapons in the next (insert state here) tea party militia recruitment video.

No security cameras guarding guns on base, ubiquitous everywhere else?

What, no media blitz about this?

have been privatized. These range from chow halls (albeit not in Basic).... all the way to medical care (some things are done by civilians, especially state side)... to yes... things like this.

Did I mention supply? I can even tell you who to blame for starting this ball going in a serious manner. One Chenney. Under him (as SecDef for poppy bush) this accelerated to levels that now we are paying for.

That's where I'd look first were I investigating.

Looks like a Dragonov too. More weapons out in the world aside, this represents a fair amount of money.