Are AR-15 and semi-automatic AK-type rifles in common use?

[Indy Lurker]

If they are, wouldn't they be protected from an assault weapons ban by the second amendment?




From Heller decision:

We may as well consider at this point (for we will have to consider eventually) what types of weapons Miller permits. Read in isolation, Miller’s phrase “part of ordinary military equipment” could mean that only those weapons useful in warfare are protected. That would be a startling reading of the opinion, since it would mean that the National Firearms Act’s restrictions on machineguns (not challenged in Miller) might be unconstitutional, machineguns being useful in warfare in 1939. We think that Miller’s “ordinary military equipment” language must be read in tandem with what comes after: “rdinarily when called for service men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. The traditional militia was formed from a pool of men bringing arms “in common use at the time” for lawful purposes like self-defense. “In the colonial and revolutionary war era, weapons used by militiamen and weapons used in defense of person and home were one and the same.” State v. Kessler, 289 Ore. 359, 368, 614 P. 2d 94, 98 (1980) (citing G. Neumann, Swords and Blades of the American Revolution 6–15, 252–254 (1973)). Indeed, that is precisely the way in which the Second Amendment ’s operative clause furthers the purpose announced in its preface. We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. That accords with the historical understanding of the scope of the right, see Part III, infra.25

[TomInTib]

1. As long as they leave my K2 alone

[Hardrada]

7. Yeah, well, I guess you're in a rough neighborhood, old chap.

You'll need it.

[TomInTib]

10. The way I see it...

If the Big One hits, I will need to grab a well-stocked boat.

I have a serviceable stock of get-it-on.

[Hardrada]

55. Good point. I wonder what my CA relatives are planning for

such an event.

[depakid]

2. As to the first question, run a google news search

for "AK-47"

http://news.google.com.au/news?ned=us&hl=en&ned=us&q=ak-47&btnG=Search+News

As to the second point, this involves fundamental rights analysis:

Gun Control’s Silver Lining

While the gun rights side will likely trumpet the decision in making the case that there are few possible “reasonable” regulations on ownership, gun control supporters will be able to argue, as Justice Breyer did during oral arguments, that many restrictions can be justified by a state interest in safety. In a way, then, the Court will put the constitutional question to rest and turn public attention to substantive debates over policies: which ones work and which do not, and which ones hinder self-defense versus protecting society.

The gun control camp will likely have an important leg up in this debate, since Tushnet says it has been hurt in the past by a slippery slope argument that suggests what it is actually trying to do is to confiscate all guns. After the Court endorses a constitutional doctrine that clearly would prohibit such a proposal, that argument becomes implausible.

No longer will genuinely reasonable restrictions, like registration requirements and bans on assault rifles and machine guns, raise the same level of suspicion. By coming down in favor of some gun rights, the Court will narrow the political debate to a terrain where supporters of gun control may actually have a stronger case to make.

Far from being the Roe of gun control, Heller might actually neutralize the most ardent gun-rights arguments, and meanwhile prompt a new approach from the gun control side, as it is forced to justify regulations to a more skeptical judicial branch. As Benjamin Wittes of the Brookings Institution argued recently in The New Republic, overturning the District’s ban will probably not be “hugely consequential in practical terms” as the ban had not exactly saved D.C. from gun violence anyway.

But the ruling has the potential to spark a new wave of legislation in D.C. and elsewhere aimed at reducing gun violence within the new set of parameters laid out by the Court.

http://hprsite.squarespace.com/gun-control-after-dc-v-072008/

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. Since an AK-47 and semi-automatic AK type rifles are different I'm not sure what your point is.

That's an interesting take on the Heller Decision, kind of silly and grasping for straws, but interesting nonetheless.

David

[depakid]

11. Actually, the take on the Heller case is standard constitutional analysis

and assumes a fundamental right (which IMO, isn't the case, but for sake of argument, I'll go along).

Take the 1st Amendment, for example. The direct textual reference is as emphatic as it can get- "Congress shall make no law...."

Now, it's been argued (unsuccessfully) over the years that "No law" means "No law...."

In fact, with respect to feedom of speech -reasonable time, place and manner restrictions are not only constitutionally permitted- but are wise public policy.

In most situations, courts apply various "balancing tests" -where the state (or coummunity) interest in a statute or regulation at hand is weighed against the individual right involved.

There's no reason whatsoever to believe the courts will abandon this approach (style of legal reasoning) with respect to the 2d Amendment- any more than they have with other, less controversial rights.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. There have reasonable restrictions in place for at least 70 years.

I don't see how finally saying that DC restrictions were too severe, is a silver lining for gun control advocates. Of course there will be continued legislation there has been in Roe v. Wade also, I suspect challenges to Heller will be similarly successful.

David

[depakid]

21. The point was that it removed the ultimate slippery slope argument

and pushes absolutists into less and less tenable positions, with respect to reasonable regulation.

Abortion is interesting in this regard.

Roe v. Wade, as some people may know- is no longer controlling law.

Under Roe, a woman's right to choose in the 1st trimester was, in the civil rights/equal protection framework- a "fundamental right" that could only be restricted by a "compelling state interest" -which is to say, exceedingly rarely.

Under Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the right to choose is not a fundamental- but a "substantial" right -that cannot be undue burdened." Thus the standard for analyzing restrictions on the right to choose are less than, say- restrictions based on race.

Moving farther toward that end of the spectrum is Lawrence v. Texas- which doesn't hold much of a constitutional right (if any at all) to sexual freedom among consenting adults -and yet it forbids the states from legislating morality in the privacy of the bedroom, because that has no rational relationship to a legitimate state purpose.

As far as I'm aware- this is the only statute struck down by the USSC using the very deferential "rational relationship" test.

Firearms jurisprudence will follow a different set of standards of course- but the basic "balancing of interests" will follow a similar pattern.

Which end of the spectrum the right to bear arms will fall on is still very much an open question- though one would expect that since the potential for harm to society is greater and more immediate, regulations limiting ownership and usage will recieve a corresponding lower level of scrutiny than civil rights or the freedom of speech or voting rights.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. The slippery slope argument was removed 70 years ago.

[depakid]

27. Actually no- and even today, it still might not be

Remember Bowers v. Hardwick?

;-)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

29. You do realize we are talking about gun law right?

[gorfle]

54. Death by a thousand cuts.

Firearms jurisprudence will follow a different set of standards of course- but the basic "balancing of interests" will follow a similar pattern.

What it sounds like you have said to me is Heller has successfully barred the door to outright bans, so now the anti-gun folks will try the approach of "Death by a thousand cuts" by using the courts to sort out this "balancing of interests".

The problem here, of course, is that once one "reasonable" restriction has been placed, the bar on what constitutes reasonable has just been raised. Consequently one can then follow up with a new "reasonable" restriction, and so on.

I think your assessment is exactly right - but gun owners aren't going to fall for it.

[jody]

16. But can "reasonable laws" be so restrictive as to ban handguns? SCOTUS said no in Heller so the next

set of cases will seek answers to just how restrictive laws can be short of banning firearms.

Given the issue is self-defense, wouldn't a law banning CCW in selected locations effectively deny a citizen with CCW his right to visit that location?

[depakid]

19. First Amendment rights are restricted in certain locations

and the individual right to self defense in a public place is also one that can easily be outweighed by the state or community interest in keeping the general population safe from incidents such as occurred at the Mt Pleasant Thanksgiving parade- or in Toys R Us -or any of dozens of other examples.

Time, place and manner restriction.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

24. Only the right to self defense hasn't been shown to endanger the public in any way.

[depakid]

28. Not sure how to argue with such an absurd statement...

other than to remind Americans that bullets go through walls- so even in your own houses, be responsible enough to use glazers.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

30. How many cases can you cite where a bystander was injured by a civilian defending them self?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

31. That goggle search isn't working to well on that one is it?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. Not even anecdote to back up your absurd statement. I really expected more.

[depakid]

33. You aren't really asking that in earnest are you?

Surely you're not making the claim that firing off guns in residential or business districts (for whatever reason) doesn't pose an immediate threat of harm to bystanders?

:shrug:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

35. Show me examples of people using firearms for self defense injuring bystanders.

It should be easy if it happens as much as you say. Millions of concealed carry permits. Lets see how many injured bystanders you can come up with.

David

[depakid]

36. There's an ENTIRE BODY OF COMMON LAW on this point!

Where do you think the cases came from!

Here's a short jury instruction compendium- see for yourself:

http://www.juryinstruction.com/members/content/national/ncjic_documents/chapter253/253_4_14.htm

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

37. So jury instructions are your answer. It shouldn't be hard to find the cases.

What about that incredible google search?

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

39. I found 2 cases from the 1950's. Are those the ones you are talking about?

One of the cases in your cite in less than 11 years old. It seems extremely common, NOT.

David

[depakid]

40. This is pointless

Usually, you're a reasonable person- but on this issue, you're seem uninterested in thinking objectively. A common theme on this forum unfortunately.

If you have full Lexis/Nexis (with Shepard’s) and American Westlaw, you can find dozens and dozens of cases (more recent and historical) -quickly and easily, without weeding though extraneous material and ideological (yet "popular" page rank) sites.

Note: these cases you'd find under represent "real life" in the states, as they are:

1. Actual trials concluded (settlements or "no files" would be excluded);

2. The cases were actually appealed; and

3. A published decision was recorded on a salient point of law.

So, for example, they would exclude every person in South Central who was "no filed" on a bystander case -or someone whose insurance may have paid- or who simply didn't make the papers, due to the fact that these sorts of stories aren't "newsworthy" anymore in certain areas.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

41. So a couple of dozen cases over the last 50 years is your evidence?

Every time someone uses a firearm in self defense in my area it makes the paper. I assure you that if someone shot a bystander in one of those cases it would make the news. The reason you can't find lots of cases is because it happens so frequently, for you to assert otherwise is disingenuous at best.

David

[depakid]

44. This isn't a trial, and if it were- I'd be motivated to find a LOT of evidence

just as other attorneys have.

Through resources that attorneys and investigators use.

You make an interesting point though. Where my SO lives- and where she and I are now, any shooting makes the news- often for several days- or longer, depending on the case. Curiously, several days ago I spoke with the guy who runs a "bottle shop." He likes Portland (among other things, he has a side business roasting fresh coffee) but he hears stories about people like him being robbed in the states.

I told him that it's not all that common, especially during his trading hours. His reply was (paraphrased): "Mate- we get a few bottles nicked, that's about it."

20 years ago, he wouldn't have said the same thing....

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

50. You wouldn't find much.

Think about it criminals don't usually commit crimes in the presence of lots of people. So civilians using firearms for self defense probably rarely do so when lots of bystanders are around to be injured. It is far more common for LEO's to injure bystanders. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem. Anyhow take care of yourself.

David

[tburnsten]

75. It is pointless.

Because all you have to do is come up with a couple of examples, some study, something to show how dangerous it is for others when someone defends themself from an attacker in a public setting. Dave found two examples from the fifties, and maybe one from eleven years ago. Seems pretty uncommon to me. Maybe you can do better.

[iverglas]

57. ah, how lovely

(and having read the rest of this sequence) to read someone who has a clue. ;)

I try to tell them these things all the time ... to no avail ...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

65. Thanks I appreciate the compliment.

[iverglas]

68. follow the dotted lines, Dave

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

69. We both know you were talking to me.

[appal_jack]

42. AK's & AR's are both in common use

As others have said already, the AR is the most popular centerfire rifle in the US today.

But, until recently, AR's have been relatively expensive, and AK-pattern semi-automatics have been relatively cheap. Now (post-election) both are expensive, but that is another story. The point of this post is that between 1991 (or so) and 2008, with a brief interruption due to the (partial, failed) AWB of 1994, inexpensive AK-pattern rifles have been one of the few spoils of the Cold War available to average US citizens.

Not many of us were able to bid upon former Soviet state enterprises as they were being privatized (nor, in fact, did I support the looting of eastern bloc economies that took place under this guise of privatization). Similarly, few of us have been able to directly tap the trade agreements that followed the 'opening' of eastern economies. However, due to the fact that Warsaw Pact nations made a metric crapload of AK's, and needed cash post-haste post-Communism, there was a decade-plus of times when the average American could purchase a reasonably high-quality self-loading firearm. In my mind, this was a good thing, a democratization of sorts of the Second Amendment. And for all the tax $$$ we paid in service of the Cold War, we damn well should get a spoil or two...

Now that's all over. As another thread notes, 'cheap' Romanian AK's are selling for $1K+. Oh well, those of you who waited had your chance: tough patooties now. But the fact remains that many thousands of these rifles were imported over the past few decades, and now the semi-automatic AK-pattern rifle must indeed be considered as 'in common use' for target practice, large varmint control (AK's are good coyote guns for ranchers), and even brush-terrain short-range deer hunting.

I agree with the other sensible folks on this thread that the NFA of 1934 established a reasonable restriction on the Second Amendment, and all subsequent curtailings of the RKBA have been unnecessary, misguided, or both. The AWB of 1994, and its reincarnations of present, are unnecessary, misguided, and unconstitutional.

-app

[tburnsten]

74. Funny thing is, assault rifles and machine guns

are already heavily regulated, require registration and a transfer tax, and are illegal for transfer or purchase if they were made after 1986.


Seems to me that gun control advocates already have the "reasonable restrictions" they are after.











Unless maybe the actual goal is to require the same level of restrictions against any rifle that has a similiar outwards appearance to an assault rifle or machine gun.

[AlinPA]

3. re: "...not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled

shotguns". It seems that using a short-barreled shotgun for self-defense would be "law-abiding".

[ManiacJoe]

5. Depending on how short....

Attempts at very wide spreads tend to miss the target.

[benEzra]

48. The point was that there are very, very few NFA Title 2 restricted short-barreled shotguns...

in lawful civilian hands. They are as rare as machineguns, and as tightly controlled. Nearly all defensive shotguns are NFA Title 1, 18" barreled guns.

The Court was saying that that the existing NFA Title 2 restrictions on sub-18" barreled shotguns could stand because the guns so restricted are not in common use.

BUT, handguns and "assault weapons" ARE in common use, as they are among the most popular civilian firearms in the nation.

[Testament]

60. That part is still a circular argument

They aren't in common use, but they've been so heavily restricted so long that that is a good deal of the reason they aren't in common use.

[benEzra]

62. Quite so. Basically, the Court badly wanted to uphold the National Firearms Act

and had to figure out a way to justify it. The decision was all about preserving the status quo.

But, that same test that upholds the NFA puts the kibosh on the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch, because "assault weapons" are some of the most common lawfully owned and used firearms in U.S. homes.

[Testament]

64. I can only hope that you are right in your second statement there. n/t

[ManiacJoe]

4. Both are extremely common.

The AR-15 is the most popular, center-fire rifle in the USA.

[jody]

6. Interesting question. I look forward to reading posts from the beetle brigade about how we should

make the "Federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

Now that's a tightly rolled ball! :puke:

[AtheistCrusader]

9. Extremely common.

Very uncommon in crimes, but extremely common for hunting, target practice, etc.

(The AR-15 popular for a lot of things but not so much for hunting, because it is chambered in .223 which is illegal for hunting Deer in many states, as it is regarded as too underpowered, but still legal for other types of game.)

[depakid]

12. Not uncommon in crimes at all

which you would see if you run a google search from time to time.

[bossy22]

13. actually they are uncommon when you look at the overall picture

i think the BATFE percentage of traces of AR-15's is about 1%.....

[depakid]

14. Depends on one's perspective

Seeing as how gun violence and accidents are rampant in the states, entries like these every week may not seem so alarming-

AK-47 fired accidentally, killing St. Paul boy, charges say
Minneapolis Star Tribune, MN - 21 Nov 2008
Gutierrez-Gonzales, who dated the victim's cousin, was on the porch, where he often slept, struggling to put a clip into an AK-47 rifle, according to a male ...
--------------

Iselin man arrested, found with AK-47, four handguns, ammunition ...
New Brunswick Home News Tribune, NJ - 26 Nov 2008
They also found two rifles -- an AK-47 and a .22-caliber rifle -- and four handguns, three of which were loaded. Police also found several boxes of...
--------------

M-16, AK-47 Found During Drug Raid
WESH.com, FL - 25 Nov 2008
Police seized an M-16 and AK-47, which are weapons used as machine guns in the military. Billy Molina was arrested by police. He was charged with illegally ...
-------------

Pasco man likely wounded by own AK-47
Mid Columbia Tri City Herald, WA - 24 Nov 2008
Investigators say it appears the man’s AK-47 blew up, because the man said he was hit at the same time his gun exploded, Keane said. ...
-------------

At least not alarming until the next mass shooting.

Point being though is that they've proliferated- which is not for the better.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

18. One person was killed in your four articles. Tragic yes, the sky is falling no.

[bossy22]

20. anecdotal evidence proves very litte

A three-year-old autistic boy died after being strangled by his seatbelt on a schoolbus this past Sunday, the Jerusalem Post reports. An aide has been arrested:

now if this kid hadnt been wearing his seatbelt he probably would have still been alive. does that mean we should not strap our children in seatbelts when they travel....i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who agreed with this statement

Anecdotal evidence is just proof that it has happened....it does not suggest its a rampant problem...everything must be put in relative terms. you may find 500 articles about ak's being used to hurt people....but in the overall picture you will find over 10,000 articles of other weapons being used to hurt people

[depakid]

23. What it shows is that this shit happens all of the time

and on any given day, despite assertions to the contrary.

Just with this particular weapon- or set of weapons.

That other similar weapons are used (high capacity semi-automatic handguns, for example) only strengthens the arguments for more responsible and comprehensive regulation.

[bossy22]

25. but in small amounts

relative to other crime events


its all relative...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. That's just asinine, anecdotal evidence doesn't trump factual statistics.

[beevul]

38. See post 34. N/T

[Pavulon]

56. Good luck,

once you ban it folks successfully win the war on drugs and that ban is working, get back to me. I'll hand over my collection on that date.

See ya never. Did you see the news, some asshole nfl player shot himself in the leg in NYC, did you know guns ARE BANNED there.

How can that happen??

[jeepnstein]

66. Here are some interesting statistics...

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_20.html

I wouldn't say it's happening all the time. It would be interesting to see how many of those murder victims were prior felons.

[jeepnstein]

67. Here it is in a more concise format...

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html

Looks to me like you are about as likely to be stabbed as shot by a rifle or an "undetermined" firearm.

[tburnsten]

76. Handguns and semiauto rifles are not "similiar weapons"

[benEzra]

49. Reality check...

2005 data:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_20.html
Total murders............................14,860.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,543......50.76%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....1,954......13.15%
Edged weapons.............................1,914......12.88%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,598......10.75%
Shotguns....................................517.......3.48%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................892.......6.00%
Rifles......................................442.......2.97%

2006 data:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_20.html
Total murders............................14,990.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,795......52.00%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....2,158......14.40%
Edged weapons.............................1,822......12.15%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,465.......9.77%
Shotguns....................................481.......3.21%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................833.......5.56%
Rifles......................................436.......2.91%

Compare the numbers for ALL RIFLES COMBINED to, say, shoes and bare hands. Or knives. Or impact weapons. And "assault weapons" are only a fraction of the rifle total.

Rifles with modern styling aren't all that highly represented in mass shootings, either. All the worst U.S. mass shootings have involved ordinary pistols using ordinary-capacity magazines, not "assault weapons" or hi-caps.

[iverglas]

58. I ran a few threads a while back doing just that

AK-47ish guns in the news. Reams of the things, from those simple Google News searches. Somehow, each tale I cited just didn't matter. The drug dealers apprehended with the things in their trunks, that sort of thing -- just not evidence of the glaringly obvious fact that there are a whole lot of them out there in the hands of a whole lot of people who ought not to have anything that fires bullets, and who just seem to have a strange affinity for this particular kind of bullet-firing thing, for reasons that nobody could ever fathom ... if it were true ... which it just isn't, you see.

[aldo]

70. There are crimes against justice and then there are crimes against paper laws

If you want to be able to communicate beyond the circle of word-game-playing-lawyers you will need to understand this.


Republicanists = economic terrorists. They hate the American way of life. They hate the middle class.

[iverglas]

87. oh no, paco!

If you want to be able to communicate beyond the circle of word-game-playing-lawyers you will need to understand this.

Moi??

Another fan club applicant?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

17. According to the FBI they account for less than 2% of crimes.

Of course google searches are much more reliable.

David

[beevul]

34. You assume much, where google is concerned.

Yes, google is good at finding things.

The um...accuracy of those things however...regarding any topic or subject...can not be assumed.

Yes, google can find the term "ak-47" or "ak 47" plenty.

Do not assume just because google finds the term, that it was properly applied originally.

An ak-47...a REAL ak-47...is an automatic weapon. Does the finding by google of the term "ak-47/ak 47", lead you to believe that an automatic weapon is whats being referred to whenever google hits on that search string?

It shouldnt. The article may be referring to some rifle that resembles an ak-47, but is nothing of the sort, such as this sar-1, which belongs to fellow DU'er Benezra, and is NOT an automatic weapon:



Point: Just because something is labelled "ak-47" does not make it an ak-47. The pictured rifle would almost certainly be labelled an "ak-47" by the media, and probably as often as not, by the police as well. But google would never know, and would give you a hit just the same.



Heres an example of the media and/or police AND google getting it wrong:





That is not an ak-47. It is not even an "ak-47 type" rifle.

It appears to be an "ar-15 type" rifle. But google doesn't know that.

It is indicative, imo, that when you enter "ar-15" into a google news search you get 845 hits, and when you run "ak-47" you get 7,788 hits.

Indicative of the term being misapplied. The term "ak-47" is used far more freely than accuracy should allow. It is an exact parallel to calling any car that is a gas sipper a "geo metro".

Note how many "ak-47" hits refer to shell casings being recovered "from an ak-47 assault rifle" in spite of the gun NOT being recovered, and consider that there are literally dozens of rifles which fire the 7.62 x 39 mm round.

Note stories such as this from a google news search a moment ago:

"Police seized an M-16 and AK-47, which are weapons used as machine guns in the military.

Billy Molina was arrested by police. He was charged with illegally installing radio equipment to monitor police. He's accused of possession of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of a firearm."

http://www.wesh.com/news/18142269/detail.html

Note how it does NOT say that the individual in question was charged with unlawful possession of a machinegun for either the ak OR the m-16 - "which are weapons used as machine guns in the military".

Unlawful possession of an automatic weapon is a federal crime, punishable by 10 years in club fed. If they could nail that guy for such, they would, and they would be telling everyone about it. Yet google gives you a hit. If it isn't a true fully automatic rifle, it can not be an ak-47, but google reports it as one.



Ak-47 rifles as reported in the media, approach the same degree of accuracy as "wmd's in iraq - as reported in the media.

I'm not saying such rifles aren't used in crime. I'm saying one can not have a clear understanding of such rifles as used in crime, simply by how many google hits one gets with using that search string.


I'm saying that in fact, one can be quite misled should one take things such as the amount of hits and the content of the stories those hits lead to - at face value.

And the examples I posted show that.

[AtheistCrusader]

45. Billy Molina.

Hahaha oh man, here's a photo gallery of stuff taken from his home. http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/112508firearms/1/lg/SurveillanceControlCenter.htm
I spy with my little eye... a .38 PAINTBALL gun and protective mask. Yeah, I've got that. What appears to be an AR-15, COULD be a machine gun, but I would have to dig into the guts of it to determine that. I note the language has been softened in this article to 'M-16 STYLE rifle'.

Paintball gun and mask.
AR-15
Bavaclavas/Ski Masks. (Maybe unusual from a temperature standpoint in Florida, however, commonly used with paintball gear, which is proudly displayed right next to a real firearm in these pictures)
Boxes of various calibers of ammo.
A .22 caliber Feather. Perfectly legal, even if it looks like some sorta wierd, evil space gun. It's probably the scariest looking weapon there, and it's a heap of crap .22 caliber gopher gun.
Walther and Taurus handguns.
Camo pants.
Boots.
Spare mags.
A radar detector
CO2 cannisters.
I have seen that police frequency streaming site before. There are several. Perfectly legal here, but I don't live in Florida, maybe there's some law there I don't know about.
Radio Shack programmable scanner. $49.95
Creme-filled oatmeal cookies.
AK-look-alike, whatever it is.
Drug Identification Bible
Frilly nightie and handcuffs. (I really don't want to know what goes on in his bedroom, thanks)


Man, I hope they have a solid lock on the drug posession part of this case, because even a public defender is going to have a field day with the rest of that crap.

[AtheistCrusader]

43. Compared to handguns, the numbers are pitifully small.

Individual, anecdotal crimes still hurt people, I would not hesitate to acknowledge that, but statistically speaking, they are a small percentage of the problem. Especially considering the long gun to pistol ratio of firearms out there.

Handguns, which are easier to illicitly traffic, easier to conceal, etc, unsurprisingly account for the majority of firearms-related crime. Whether I look at total number of incidents, or per capita, people affected, etc, by any definition of 'common' that I am aware of, that can be applied to a group of firearms, these rifles are uncommon in crime.

[joshcryer]

46. But I bet SUVs kill more than compacts.

:D

[benEzra]

53. Hunting rifles are the SUV's...big, heavy, much more powerful, and stodgy.

"Assault weapons" are sport compacts. Lighter, less powerful, and much more interesting.

[Indy Lurker]

47. Are there more AR-15 type rifles and semi-automatic AK-type rifles in the US than Bolt action rifles

If they are commonly owned, why wouldn't they be protected by the Heller decision?

[jeepnstein]

51. They'd be more common...

If foreign makers such as FN or HK could get in on the action. Right now it's a U.S. makers only market. Most of the manufacturers are running wide open and still not keeping up with demand. The AR is just so good at so many things that it is quickly being accepted by guys who would never have considered one a few years ago. The prices are coming down to a point where they make much better sense than a Mini 14 or some Fudd gun as an all-purpose rifle.

Bolt guns are still very popular, and for good reason. If you want to shoot something with a very powerful cartridge at a very long distance, the bolt gun is a very good choice.

[akgirl]

52. They well surpass the number of bolt guns in my collection.

I own only 2 bolt guns (one is technically not a firearm by federal definition as it's pre-99). The AR-15/AK number well over that. Of other folks in my gun club, most own at least an AR (only because they have not yet understood the genius of Mr. Kalishnakov's design and are still in love with Mr. Stoner's ugly hunk of junk ;) )

From a "general usage" standpoint, both are excellent general purpose rifles and it's no surprise how much they've taken off since the end of the ban. With the AR upper swap out, the AR becomes a great overall rifle. With the ease of maintenance, and the simplicity of design, the AKM semi auto variant, also has advantages that make it a perfect general purpose rifle.

[jeepnstein]

59. "Stoner's ugly hunk of junk"?

I live for the day when the only thing we have to argue about here is AR versus AK threads. I won't start that bunkhouse match right now no matter how tempting it is.

The only "problem" I have with the AK is the lack of chamberings in NATO rounds. That's hardly surprising given the origins of it. I should have bought that Valmet in .223 a few years back...

[benEzra]

61. Not as much of a problem anymore...

there are some very, very nice Hungarian and Russian civilian AK's in .223, and Saigas in .308/7.62x51mm. Not to mention .22LR (WASR-22) and 12-gauge.


http://www.impactguns.com/store/SLR-106FR.html

Pricey, but I'd love to have one.

7.62x39mm models are far cheaper, though.

And yes, I welcome the day when we have regular AR vs. AK threads in Outdoor Life... :D

[Pavulon]

63. sports..

never had to use it but still concerning concept...

[Scout]

71. yeah, my stupid ass brother in law has one

just for fun you know ... he target shoots with it. he thinks it's cool, and he thinks he looks cool when he plays with it.

he doesn't need one for anything, he doesn't have a dangerous job, he doesn't live in a dangerous neighborhood.

he's just an asshole.

[jmg257]

72. Too bad for you - being related to an ass hole and all. Nothing you could do to change

your sibling's mind?

[rrneck]

73. You have a real point there. Drug dealers, gang bangers and

other assorted punks gravitate to an AK looking weapon because it looks cool. Like spinner hubcaps and droopy pants. It doesn't do them much good but they just gotta have one anyway.

I wonder how many upstanding citizens acquire these scary looking weapons because they look cool or they think they look cool shooting them without any real need for them or any appreciation for how dangerous they are? The fact that upstanding citizens would not willingly shoot anyone with them and store them safely doesn't obviate the fact that American consumer excess can be found in the firearms industry just like everywhere else. I get those catalogs in the mail that pitch all those nifty looking goodies better suited to a deployment in Iraq that for recreational shooting, hunting or home defense. They're not selling all those "pimp your gun" accessories to the bad guys.

[benEzra]

77. A question...

I wonder how many upstanding citizens acquire these scary looking weapons because they look cool or they think they look cool shooting them without any real need for them or any appreciation for how dangerous they are? The fact that upstanding citizens would not willingly shoot anyone with them and store them safely doesn't obviate the fact that American consumer excess can be found in the firearms industry just like everywhere else.

Your "how dangerous they are" comment puzzles me. You do realize that these are small-caliber, non-automatic civilian guns, not military automatic weapons, yes?

A non-automatic civilian AK is identical to a Ruger Mini Thirty deer rifle---same caliber (similar to .30-30 Winchester), same rate of fire, same range of magazine capacities, same accuracy. The only real difference is that the Ruger's gas system is below the barrel instead of above it, for a more traditional early 20th century look.



I own a civilian AK (that's my carbine in the top photo), and shoot competitively and recreationally with it. If I ever take up hunting, it will be with that rifle, and no one can argue that a 5-shot .30-30 shooting 154-grain softpoints at 2000 fps isn't a reasonable hunting rifle for small eastern whitetails in the woods. The Ruger Mini Thirty (bottom photo) is identical in every way but looks.

BTW, how many AK and AR owners do you know personally? Nationally, more Americans own "assault weapons" than hunt, and I dare say we don't fit the stereotype you have of us.

all those nifty looking goodies better suited to a deployment in Iraq that for recreational shooting, hunting or home defense.

Such as?

The most popular accessories I see are 1x optics, vertical foregrips, flashlight mounts, and the Weaver rails to mount them, along with adjustable stocks. All of those are very practical for shooting, hunting, and home defense, and the ability to easily accept them is one of the selling points of "black rifles" compared to more traditional looking carbines like the Ruger.

[rrneck]

78. I have never owned an AK nor do I plan to, although it looks like it would be fun to shoot. All I

have is a Remington 870 and a Colt 45. That's enough for me.

As far as the whole "assault rifle/weapon" controversy goes they're all just rifles. It doesn't matter how they are configured, none of the ergonomic or cosmetic features that are added to them will change their basic function - which is to propel a projectile downrange into a target.

For the record: If anyone thinks they need to have a rifle, pistol, or shotgun to defend themselves they should have that option. If they feel they need any of the accessories you mentioned as well as any others they should have that option as well. Here's why: I could not, in good conscience, look anybody in the eye and guarantee that the (Democrat) I voted for or the system that my tax dollars fund will be there to protect them in the few minutes they need them most. Failing that guarantee, any individual should have the right to use whatever technology he or she can afford and safely maintain to hold off the threat until the blue light cavalry arrives.

Yes, I realize they are small caliber non military guns. They are still dangerous, or why own one for self defense? Even a .22 single shot rifle can be lethal if you point it in the right direction. What I was questioning, perhaps less than artfully, was the acquisition and use of deadly weapons and associated accoutrement as a lifestyle accessory. For the same reasons stated above I have no right to tell anybody how to configure a weapon any more than I can tell them what kind of shoes to wear. If you need it, you need it and that's fine with me. But one thing's for sure, it makes the weapon more expensive. Hell, the weapon itself is expensive. That means it is helping to keep a corporate jet in the air somewhere.

This post is getting too long, but what I was trying to do is to point out that we are all susceptible to the siren call of consumerism, even when it comes to something as serious, important, and necessary as a means to defend ourselves when the worst happens. Call me a cheap bastard, but I think I could hold them off with a scattergun and keep my money in my pocket.

[benEzra]

79. Ah, I see. I thought you were saying that AK's and AR's

are more dangerous to own than more traditional-looking firearms, but that's not what you were saying at all, if I read you correctly.

FWIW, I don't own a shotgun, but if I were going to buy one, it would probably be an 870; 8 million owners can't be all wrong. And at inside-the-home distances, there is no question that a .729 caliber pump shotgun surpasses any .22 or .30 caliber carbine in lethality.

On the other hand, my $379 AK is cheaper than a defensive shotgun + target rifle + hunting rifle, and can fulfill all three roles simply by swapping magazines and optics. So I am a cheap bastard in my own way (though my AK does have a flashlight and an optic on it). :)

[rrneck]

80. Thanks for your patient and

considered response. I'm new here and I'm still learning about this whole forum thing.

$379 y'say? Hmmmmm.....

[benEzra]

81. That price was in 2003. SAR-1's are going for a bit more now...

but I still see a few on Gunbroker for $400, though they will probably bid up a little before they're sold. You'd have to factor in whatever your local FFL would charge to do the paperwork. Still, even $500 out the door is significantly cheaper than a Mini Thirty, and magazines are cheaper.

[SteveM]

83. If I were younger, I would select an AR 15 or AK platform for deer hunting...

I fired an AK semi-auto carbine after deer-hunting last year. The recoil was negligible, accuracy very good, ergonomics superior. There are a number of "deer-caliber" semi-auto carbines designed for hunting, now on the market.

[benEzra]

84. I bought a hunting magazine for mine shortly after buying the rifle...

with the intent that if I ever have the opportunity (and $$$) to take up hunting, it will be with that rifle.

Hunting configuration:



With 154-grain softpoints, presto: a 5-shot .30-30 Winchester.

[SteveM]

85. And affordable when compared with an AR 15 platform...

Nice-looking set up. Are there any "makes" of AKs (or inexpensive modifications) to improve the accuracy?

My late Dad gave me good advice about hunting: Broach the subject whenever you get in a group of folks. Some won't be interested; others will be offended. But eventually you will run across a few folks who hunt and are willing to let you come out to their land. I hunt two such places in Texas each year, and it certainly cuts down on the expense (leases are 2K+). Check out the public hunting opportunities where you live (pretty thin here). I have "drawn" into several over the years, and occasionally visit national forests where hunting is free. Doing your own field-dressing (really a must), skinning, quartering and kitchen-sink butchering will save even more. I now have a freezer 3/4 full of whitetail and axis deer. Given the economy, this helps me (and some others) out materially.

[benEzra]

86. The easiest way to make an AK considerably more accurate

is to fit an optic of some sort. Most Americans aren't as used to notch-and-post style sights on rifles as they are aperture sights, and also the sight radius is rather short.

I now run a Russian Kobra on mine (photo below), which is an unmagnified dot-style sight with selectable reticles (dot, chevron, dot-chevron, T-bar). Even without magnification, ringing the 200-yard steel ram is pretty easy. Just don't get a dot that's too big, or else it starts obscuring the target (the Kobra's dot is 1.8 arcminute, which is about right IMO). A magnified optic like the POSP (the 4x scope in the photo upthread) is great for hunting, but you lose close-range capability which is as important to me as distance shooting.




(with dot-chevron reticle selected)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=271x1177

Another thing that helps accuracy is to replace the slant brake (if the AK comes with one, mine didn't) with either an AK-74 style brake, or a flash suppressor like either the Phantom or the Smith Enterprises Vortex (best on the market, IMO, and has been shown to improve accuracy somewhat over even a bare muzzle). The slant brake tends to put a lot of off-axis gas pressure on the bullet as the bullet exits the muzzle, and the resulting gyroscopic nutation can double group size.

Ammo choice is important; some rifles like particular brands better than others, and many shoot 154-grain softpoints better than the lighter 122/123 grain rounds.

Finally, shooting technique is important. Apply the same focus on fundamentals that you'd use shooting a bolt-action (breath control, don't slap the trigger, surprise break, follow through), and if shooting from a bench, support the rifle as far back as possible to minimize jumping from barrel vibration.

[moroni]

82. Just put together a hog gun in....

.458 Socom using the AR15 platform. There are lots of hogs here in Florida. A friend at work says he has them on his property and has invited me to harvest one or two;... and I have to reload as the rounds are at least $2.00 or more each. Another hobby. I read that the .458 Socom was originally designed for CQB as the 5.56mm was not having the desired effect on enemy combatants. The effective range (for hunting) is limited to about 200 or so meters... depending on the reloads and shooter. It replicates the ballistics of the old 45-70 used some years ago (and still in use). Other (common) calibers that can utilize the AR15 platform are the 6.5 Grendel, 6.8SPC, 450 Bushmaster, and the 50 Beowulf. Not a bad assortment. The platform is also used for pistol caliber rounds such as the 9mm. It even provides a platform for the venerable .22.

[Jack_DeLeon]

88. They are common...

most firearms new rifles sold today are semiauto with ARs and AKs being the most popular.

I own one of each.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the AK is one of the most common weapons in the world.