My local Dunham’s Sports has at least 20 of them, ranging from imports to accurized and modified models.
Again, though, it’s worth noting that the AK-47 is a specific weapon. This guy was, with 99.999% certainty, carrying a semi-automatic variant of an actual AK-47. There is no way that it was select fire.
Again, I make this point because some people like to capitalize on the ignorance of people to attempt to push through bans based on similar appearance to other weapons of dissimilar function.
If it’s an actual AK-47, it’s not a semi-automatic, now is it? That’s why I’m surprised. Hm. After careful review, there’s a metric assload of AK-47 alike semi-automatics, that are also called AK-47s.
Right. Let’s rephrase my statement above. “An AK-47? Huh. I heard some odd statements that were to the effect that the goverment wasn’t sure the stepfather had it legally. If it was a fully automatic AK-47, that’d explain it. Was it, or was it a semi-automatic?”
Note: I don’t like AKs much, so I’ve never paid attention to the sporting variants. I know the models, but I always assumed the semi-automatic varieties had a slightly different actual name, like the M-16’s AR-15 cousin.
As others have said, it’s not a REAL AK-47 like you see on the enemy in 'Nam, or in the movies. It is a modified version that is semi-automatic only, legally sold in the U.S. Same way with the SKS; not the real deal, modified semi-auto version.
This creates confusion, as it confused you as well, because people watch war documentaries on the History Channel and see AK-47s, then hear that term again and think that THOSE are the weapons on the streets of the U.S. Nothing could be further from the truth…
M16s often carry AR-15 markings. The only real difference is the bolt and trigger group. If you buy those parts (legally) and install them in your AR-15, voila! You have a select-fire AR-15. Those parts, not the weapon per se, are the parts that are controlled. If you peruse the gun auction sites, you’ll find that the receivers and the conversion parts are the controlled items. The entire weapon need not be included, or even assembled.
I’m aware of that, as well, Airman.
My goal in life is to build an Alexander Arms Beowulf and use it to shoot old computers to extreme death with. I just wasn’t aware there was no other term for an AK-47 (civilian) than AK-47.
While you’re talking about blowing things up, check out what a 50 BMG does to a running lawn mower. 
No, they are the real deal. They just have the semii-auto trigger on them.
What you’re suggesting is like saying my car isn’t really a Mustang GT because I didn’t opt for the Cobra version.
We try to find blame for these shootings in many areas, the family, guns, society, etc., but I believe we need to look at the shooter, and the society that breeds them. Suicides are up, way up here in the U.S. Sometimes the person who wishes to commit suicide wants to take others with them. They don’t like themselves or others or their lives. We send them school to learn a lot of facts and give them nothing to live for or by. I like the work of Victor E. Frankl to help explain why. We need meaning to life. Frankl survived a German death camp and taught a meaning to life.
I think it is more like saying you have a Mustang, when you really have a Focus just because Ford made it.
Sure, the two guns are cosmetically the same, but the fact that it is semi-auto only makes it a knock off…
Just out of curiousity, if your wife, daughter or mother were killed by someone and the killer ended up walking because the police didn’t read him his rights before getting a confession and/or failed to get a valid search warrant, would you no longer buy the old ‘Better a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail’ saying?
Similarly, is there a limit to the number of psychos walking the street before you’d say ‘I’ll give up my 4th and 5th Ammendment rights to stop this madness’?
If your answer to these questions is no, please explain why you think the answer should be different for the 2nd Ammendment.
From news reports, the shooter in this instance had the weapon the night before and showed it to the mother of the friend he was living with. She thought it was too old be be functional. about an hour before the shootings, he called this woman and directed her to his suicide note. (unconfirmed rumors have it that he mentions “taking a few pieces of shit with me”)
One wonders why she did not pick up the phone and call authorities to maybe let them know there was a very depressed and suicidal teen with a gun wandering around the city and that looking for him might be the thing to do…
Two of the members of the shooter’s circle of friends have been arrested for sending threatening text messages to a girl that has come forward to talk about the shooter’s history.
When I get a text message, the sender is pretty clearly identified and I can save the message for as long as I like. That would not be the method I would use to make a threat, but that’s just me
No, not really. They are identical except for a rather simple trigger mechanism and a selector switch. 98% of the rest of the weapon is the same.
Just out of curiosity, why are female family members always presented in these scenarios? Are men impervious to bullets, or do men not get avenged? If it’s a father, a brother or a husband, do their loved ones say “That’s life”? Some of the victims in the VT shooting were men.
I was just parallelling Polerius; ask him/her why.
I’m undecided about the value of allowing CC permits to everybody.
But the 2nd Amendment is front-loaded with this phrase: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…”
It doesn’t say: "Because mentally unstable teenagers might shoot at you with firearms in public places, “the right of the people…” yada yada.
It doesn’t say: “Because some crack head might invade your home,”…“the right of the people to put automated firearms on their property, when they’re not at home, to shoot any person, shall not be infringed.”
I like the idea of “the security of a free State” as well as the next guy. But I wonder if my Glock is going to make a big difference.
How about allowing CCW for NOBODY?:eek:
Because unless you’re a police officer (or retired police officer) that’s the situation here in Wisconsin and in Illinois. And while open carry is legal here in the Land of Cheese, it’s not very accepted by the general public, making it a pain in the ass for the poor, overtaxed citizen exercising his rights!!! Somehow the safety of cops, off duty cops, and retired cops (and that includes me, so I know what I’m bitching about) is more important than the safety of the average citizen!!!:mad:
Goodness me, if only I’d mentioned terrorism at some point in this dicussion. :rolleyes:
Amen.