Man uses AK-47 clone for home defense...

[Endangered Specie]

http://mobile.newsday.com/news.jsp?key=204042&rc=ts

Two burglars chose the wrong house to invade when they broke into an Inwood home early Sunday morning. They were greeted by the resident who opened fire on them with his AK-47-style assault rifle, Nassau police said.

It was 5:32 a.m. Sunday when the male resident, 36, "heard suspicious noises coming from the front door of his home, and armed himself with a Romanian SAR-1 rifle," a variant of the Soviet AK-47 assault weapon, a police report said.

The two men "broke through the front door and were confronted by the victim, who shot four times toward the subjects," the police report said.

The burglars ran off, apparently uninjured, and four rifle shell casings were later found at the house, police said.

One of the men appeared to have been carrying a knife, the resident reported.

Fourth Squad detectives are investigating.

[flvegan]

1. Someone needs an Ultradot.

Okay, that was a little cold.

[Lex1775]

6. Or some range time...

I know the SAR (or the AK in general) isn't exactly the pinnacle of accuracy... but you'd think at least 1 of 4 shots at close range would've hit.

[benEzra]

15. A SAR will stay on a playing card at 50 yards with cheap Wolf ammo...

and will put an entire magazine through the same hole at home-defense distances.

He may have been firing warning shots, may have not practiced shooting in the dark (can't see the sights in low light, one reason why I have a Kobra on mine), or may have been shooting while moving since one of the attackers had a knife. Or the attackers may have hauled posterior as soon as they saw what he was holding. Possibly a combination of all the above.

[spin]

11. I've often heard that the normal rational person...

doesn't really want to kill someone. Throw in adrenaline surge and fear and you might have the explanation for the number of times that people miss at close range.

For far too long, officers have believed if they could shoot the X ring at 25 yards, they could easily perform well at closer distances. If you read into the combat record and history of any war, however, you’ll find that shooting at extremely close ranges causes the human body to act in an entirely different manner than it does at long range. It’s commonly referred to as the fight-or-flight syndrome,

************snip****************

A close-quarter shoot is not easy. Don’t believe me? Then how do you explain that nationally, police officers average a 93-percent hit rate at 5 feet at the range, but at 5 feet on the street that figure drops to 20 percent?

http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-articles/articles/lom/0307/fast_furious_and_in_your_face.html;jsessionid=733AF9AC2BD78E917EBB0132AFAF5E84

[flvegan]

12. I don't think anyone WANTS to kill anyone. But, if you pull your piece

you better be ready to end it. This isn't emotion here.

As for the police hit rate, holster the Glock and put a Mossberg in their hands. Let me know those new stats.

Shit, I don't even believe in killing animals to eat, but if some fucker comes in my house with intent to do harm, I'll chamber and holster my .45 but the first bark comes from my 500.

[spin]

34. I agree but,

it's easy to say what you would do in a home invasion but talk is cheap.

A lot depends on the individual and his mindset. I once asked a retired police officer about if being a good shot at the range made a difference. He told me of two incidents. In the first, the police officer, who was a excellent shot, drew and fired his weapon at a bad guy on the street. He managed to hit a street light and a front porch. In the second incident, the officer who always had a hard qualifying on the range, confronted a bad guy holding a female hostage with a knife to her throat. His one shot to the perp's head was a instant kill.

Training is important both for the ability to use your weapon and for developing the mindset that will allow you to use that ability. Some people have the ability to preform under stress, others have to develop it. But until you find yourself in a life or death situation, how do you know how you will react.

One person shooter computer games are a possibility. Years ago I played a game called Escape from Wolfenstein. The game was a lot of fun until I realized that I was training myself to kill. The problem with this was that in this game you killed everything you encountered. I'm sure better games are made today where you encounter both good guys and bad guys and have to make a choice.

Hopefully if you do have a intruder in your house, the noise when you chamber a round in your Mossberg and your .45 will cause him to leave.

A few days ago the burglar alarm at the Auto Parts store across the street went off at 1 AM. The store had been broken into the month before. I wandered outside on the porch to watch the police response. The officer responded without a siren or lights. When he left his vehicle, he chambered a round into his shotgun. I was at least 45 feet away and the noise was unmistakable. I know the officer personally and have went shooting with him. He's an excellent shot and obviously no fool. If you think there's a possibility that you might have to use a weapon, choose a shotgun.

Some people call Doc Holiday the most dangerous gunfighter in the Old West. He used a shotgun (a coach gun) at the OK corral.

[virginia mountainman]

2. Not an AK47...

A Romanian SAR-1 rifle...

Just goes to prove, that the type of gun matters not, it is the intent of the person holding it.

[iverglas]

3. let the betting begin

Mine is:

drugs

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. What are you betting on?

[Lex1775]

5. Impossible!

All AK-47's and their variants are armor piercing bullet hoses that can only be fired from the hip at 7 gajillion rounds per minute! If this man had actually used an AK-47 variant death machine he would've immediately mowed down all of his neighbors, police officers, kittens, puppies, and unicorns within a three mile radius before one of the criminals wrestled his gun away and used it on him! :sarcasm:

Ok, all sarcasm aside, I'd be interested to see the details that come out of this. Having a SAR-1 as your primary home defense weapon is kind of... curious. I own an AK-47 variant and it would be the last firearm I would grab during a home invasion.

[sir pball]

7. Why?

I very recently acquired a Beretta Stor CX4 in .45 that is now my primary home defense weapon (with both an AimShot 532nm green laser at 7m and Bushnell Holo at 50) but prior to that it was my Mini-14 carbine...a relatively short barrel semiauto rifle with appropriate optics is pretty good for CQB; it handles well and has a hell of a lot more punch than my 1911 (don't get me wrong, finest handgun ever and it would make a fine primary)...what's your pick for in the house?

I know I know, but my shotguns all have 24"+ barrels, not too convenient for indoors. One day I'll get a shorty semiauto..

[Lex1775]

8. Over-penetration

That mostly rests on the fact that my neighbors houses are no more than five feet away from mine on either side, and I don't have bulletproof walls.

I either use a SA 1911 or a Winchester 1300 Defender.

[sir pball]

9. Fair enough.

I live about 7/8 of a mile from my nearest neighbor so that's no worry for me at all. I have a Marlin 1895 in 45-70 that I was debating keeping at the ready but that's overkill even for me :evilgrin:

[Endangered Specie]

10. fire that thing indoors and the only thing you'll say to the police is

"WHAT?!?"

[benEzra]

16. 16" barreled AK is no louder than a handgun or shotgun in terms of dB

although the sound spectrum is undoubtedly "boomier" (i.e., more long-wavelength component).

http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

Table 1. SHOTGUN NOISE DATA (DECIBEL AVERAGES)

.410 Bore 28" barrel.....150dB
26" barrel...............150.25dB
18 _" barrel.............156.30dB
20 Gauge 28" barrel......152.50dB
22" barrel...............154.75dB
12 Gauge 28" barrel......151.50dB
26" barrel...............156.10dB
18 _" barrel.............161.50dB

Table 2. CENTERFIRE RIFLE DATA
.223, 55GR. Commercial load 18 _" barrel.....155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel...........................155.9dB
.30-30 in 20" barrel.........................156.0dB
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel.....................157.5dB
.308 in 24" barrel...........................156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel.........................158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 _" barrel.......................163.2dB
.375 — 18" barrel with muzzle brake...........170 dB

Table 3. CENTERFIRE PISTOL DATA
.25 ACP...........155.0 dB
.32 LONG..........152.4 dB
.32 ACP...........153.5 dB
.380..............157.7 dB
9mm...............159.8 dB
.38 S&W...........153.5 dB
.38 Spl...........156.3 dB
.357 Magnum.......164.3 dB
.41 Magnum........163.2 dB
.44 Spl...........155.9 dB
.45 ACP...........157.0 dB
.45 COLT..........154.7 dB

The SAR will be a little louder than the .30-30/20" barrel, maybe 158-159 dB or comparable to a 9mm. Just for kicks, check out the .357 dB rating...

[Endangered Specie]

56. mmmm a few things:

most AKs have some sort of compensator/slat brake which would make them louder and, does this data consider the 'indoor' effect? I would imagine that being indoors, while it may not increase dB, will increase the exposure time.

Very interesting how the .357 is an ear splitter, prob a snub nose!

eta: of course, most SAR-1s dont have threaded barrells so my first point may be mute (no pun).

[sir pball]

23. Yeah, the ported barrel just makes it worse

Even with good earplugs under good earmuffs that is one noisy sumfbitch.

Pretty mild on the shoulder though, all things considered.

[benEzra]

18. That's reasonable.

Although keep in mind that .45 JHP's will penetrate walls as well as a .223, though not as much as imported 7.62x39mm. Cor-Bon 125gr JHP and Glasers would penetrate less than imported 7.62x39mm but are prohibitively expensive.

I live in a brick house, so my SAR-1 is commonly on defensive standby in the safe since I sold my .223. In your situation, the shotgun would be a better choice, though.

[jmg257]

13. I tell you, I like those Storms more and more. Kind of a love em/hate em thing for many,

as they are a so-called "compromise", but I think they fill a couple "around the house" niches nicely. I also recommended it to my sister-in-law when she asks for good house gun ideas.

I have the 9mm version and it has been 100% reliable, is plenty accurate, uses the same mags as my 92F, and can stretch the effective range out to 50 yards or so. My son likes it too - low recoil, and light enough & fits him well. I was toying with selling it off but we shot it this weekend and he loves it so its a keeper!

I was looking at the .40/.45 also, but wasn't happy with the capacity, as I am in NY and need to have pre-94' standard cap mags available. Have to keep my HEAVY Thompson for big bore coverage.

[iverglas]

17. why quelle coincidence

The Beretta Cx4 Storm carbine is what Kimveer Gill used to kill one woman and seriously injure other people in an aborted shooting rampage at Dawson college in Montreal a couple of years ago.

The Ruger Mini-14 is what Marc Lépine used to kill 14 women and injure about 14 other people in his shooting rampage at the Montréal Polytechnique 14 years ago last week.

They do seem to be the tool for the job.

[benEzra]

19. And if he had said ".38 revolver," you could have mentioned Gang Lu...

who killed 5 in a notorious college shooting a while back.

If he had said "Glock", you could have said "Virginia Tech." "Ruger 9mm," Luby's Cafeteria and the LIRR shooting. "Bolt-action deer rifle," the Charles Whitman shooting and the Jonesboro, Arkansas school shooting. "Bird hunting shotgun with 3-shell capacity," the Trolley Square shooter. "12 gauge deer hunting shotgun," the NIU shooting. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to come up with a common firearm type that has not been ill used.

That's the fallacy of wanting to see a pattern when there is no pattern. The most common weapons in mass shootings are ordinary handguns (both pistols and revolvers), followed by shotguns and rifles of all types. Rifles with modern styling are not overrepresented.

[iverglas]

21. well hey

All those guys obviously just weren't as smart as Gill and Lépine and sir pball, eh?

[sir pball]

25. Ae you kidding?

Whitman killed one more than Lépine discounting both Claire Wilson's unborn child and David Gunby, who ultimately passed on in 2001 from kidney damage from the shooting. Using a perfectly innocuous bolt-action rifle at several hundred yards.

I'd call that a bit smarter than a frothing traumatically abused fundamentalist whacko who didn't even manage to kill the people he WANTED to (per his suicide note).

Incidentally, I'll thank you not to lump me in with those psychopaths just because I choose to own an inanimate object you find personally distasteful. Just because you want me to fit your stereotype doesn't mean I do.

[iverglas]

26. incidentally

Incidentally, I'll thank you not to lump me in with those psychopaths just because I choose to own an inanimate object you find personally distasteful. Just because you want me to fit your stereotype doesn't mean I do.

You speak for yourself, and I'll speak for mine.

The only lump you belong to is the lump of people who own/use the tool in question. It's an inanimate object. What's yer problem? I'm sure I brush my teeth with the same tool as Charles Manson. Doesn't bother me.

As for what I find "distasteful" and what "stereotype" I might want you to fit, well, you keep on putting words in my mouth. I don't give a crap. I'm just on my way to brush my teeth now ...

[sir pball]

32. In that case I'm just dying to know

What you were intending to mean then?

I like to think I'm fairly handy with the language but I just can't see how "All those guys obviously just weren't as smart as Gill and Lépine and sir pball, eh?" isn't meant to connect me to their particular ideas and actions.

If it doesn't bother you what tools I own, why did you bring it up?

[iverglas]

36. ... the colour of the pigs flying over my house?

If it doesn't bother you what tools I own, why did you bring it up?

Why did I do WHAT now?

Why did *I* bring up the tools you own??

You mean in that post there where YOU said:

I very recently acquired a Beretta Stor CX4 in .45 that is now my primary home defense weapon (with both an AimShot 532nm green laser at 7m and Bushnell Holo at 50) but prior to that it was my Mini-14 carbine...

Why, I just don't know. I just don't know how to answer that "question". Why did I bring up the "tools" you own? Me, I don't know why you brought up the tools you own. But that's a whole nother question.

I brought up the tools that Marc Lépine and Kimveer Gill owned, and used. They were coincidentally the same as the ones that you, clever fellow that you obviously are, own and use, or at least own for use.

It does indeed look like they are good tools for the jobs in question. The jobs in question, in all three cases, being firing bullets at people to cause injury or death, and a clever fellow like yourself having chosen them for doing that job.

Did I get something dreadfully wrong here?

[sir pball]

42. Rather.

The jobs in question, in all three cases, being firing bullets at people to cause injury or death, and a clever fellow like yourself having chosen them for doing that job.

Weeelll...the Mini-14 has admittedly killed a deer, but the primary purpose of both of the firearms in question is putting holes in pieces of paper and occasionally causing a gallon jug of water to explode in a most satisfying fashion.

Yes, they've both also been kept ready for the possible eventuality of firing at a human being, but that's far from their primary purpose or the reason I bought either of them. I should hope the difference between keeping a firearm at home for a worst case scenario versus wandering around in public firing at whatever suits my fancy...I certainly know you're intelligent enough to be capable of appreciating the difference.

I've always wanted a nice yanagi knife too, but that doesn't mean I intend to kill 7 people with it.

[AtheistCrusader]

52. You forgot the AimShot laser.

A useless, vanity toy.

[sir pball]

54. Hardly.

Sure, when things are nice and quiet and I'm calm and steady it sure is a "Type R" sticker on a Civic...but if God forbid something comes crashing through the door at 3am and I'm startled awake it would sure be nice to have an intense green dot showing me right where the bullet is going to go. Plus there is the psychological effect that would hopefully keep me from having to use a bullet.

I'm surprised it hasn't been suggested I'm going to use it to blind pilots, after all, green laser pointers ARE the choice that.

[AtheistCrusader]

58. There's an old saying, 'tracers work both ways'.

If you're downrange, that may or may not be true, but with a high powered laser, it's a given. I certainly see the point of it, but the risks and drawbacks are numerous.

1. You are advertising your position when it's on.
2. It may fail mechanically, leaving you without it in time of need. (Battery dead, or some internal part may fail)
3. It may be knocked out of alignment on a door frame or somesuch, leaving you firing away from your target. Way out there on the end of the barrel is a easy place to smack something.

A flashlight can suffer from 1&2, but it carries added benefits, such as being somewhat blinding to your target, and getting knocked out of perfect alignment is less of a critical failure. You don't NEED it to aim.


Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I like my iron sights. Even an ACOG functions somewhat without power, and is much harder to damage. I have a hard time taking a laser pointer on a firearm seriously.

[sir pball]

64. Good points, but...

1. I have a bright-ass light on the gun too, I'm not too worried about giving away my position. Matter of fact, with the green beam, if I sweep it across somebody's eyes they're going to be out. I'd rather blind than kill.

2. Already thought about that...if it does go I can still see the front sight post through the holosight; at ~5 yards it's only about an inch-1.5 off from actual POI which is close enough for a center-mass shot. Check the battery at least once a week, if it flickers at all time for a new one!

3. It's mounted on the stock, right in front of my hand, so while it still COULD be whacked on something it's nowhere near as likely as if it were way out on the barrel. That was one reason I got the Storm actually, the three-way Picatinny rail was in a really good position.

I'm definitely not arguing the possible weaknesses and it's definitely a bit of an affectation especially in green but I can still see it being useful. At the least, it's great fun to get some cheap soda and blow up nine cans as fast as I can :D

[tburnsten]

31. Post of the thread!

[iverglas]

37. huh

Whitman killed one more than Lépine ... . Using a perfectly innocuous bolt-action rifle at several hundred yards.

Different tools for different jobs, eh?

Lépine and Gill were not several hundred yards from anything except maybe a bus stop a couple of buildings away. The targeted victims were in the same room with them. Seems to me like they picked the right tools for their jobs.

Interesting characterization of Lépine. His suicide note is commonly understood as a bit of grandstanding, I think. If he had wanted to kill the prominent women he named, he would not have headed for a post-secondary institution with a couple of guns and a bunch of ammunition and killed himself.

So like I wuz saying.

Kimveer Gill wore a duster coat. I have a duster coat of the Australian Outback brand variety that is probably older than Kimveer Gill was.

You and Marc and Kimveer seem to be in agreement on the right tool for your jobs.

Kimveer and I seem to be in agreement on the right coat for our jobs.

I haven't ever considered pitching a fit of self-rigeous indigation should someone point out our common taste.

[sir pball]

22. I suppose

My .22LR bolt guns are at least "acceptable".

Ah crap. Good thing I don't dislike Mondays that much :)

[gorfle]

40. Well played, sir. n/t.

[jmg257]

35. I was never that taken with the mini-14. Looked at them often enough, but always passed.

Also used by Michael Platt quite devastatingly in the FBI shootout in Florida in '86, so yes - they can be effective.

[sir pball]

55. Going for a song

And I could hum the right tune.

Plus it's a damned sight more reliable than an AR, especially if I don't have the time to strip it down every few hundred rounds.

[jmg257]

59. Whoa - more reliable then an AR??? Those are fighting words! Just kidding.

I came so close so many times, just always wanted something...more I guess. Like most Rugers - indeed a good value, as my ARs were quite a bit more.

Hmmm...maybe a mini-30 so I can use up some of the 7.62x39 I have.

[TPaine7]

43. LOL! n/t

[Bosso 63]

14. Two words-- 1.shot 2. gun

[iverglas]

20. and conversely

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/nov/22/police-seize-two-ak-47-rifles-from-home-02/

PORT ST. LUCIE — Police arrested two 18-year-old men and seized two AK-47 rifles in connection with a late Wednesday night home invasion robbery in which drugs, money and sneakers were stolen, according to reports released Friday.

... According to accounts detailed in reports, a 23-year-old man and a 19-year-old woman sat on the living room couch as anotherperson, an 18-year-old man, returned home from work.

The 18-year-old man said as he opened a garage door a man in a hooded sweatshirt and a bandana over his face poked the muzzle of a rifle in his jaw and told him to go inside. Two gunmen followed him in and made the three people get on the floor.

A 20-year-old man and his 29-year-old sister arrived about that time, and the 20-year-old brother was pulled in by one of the gunmen and told to get on the floor. The sister ran ran from the scene, according to a police report.

The two gunmen demanded money and drugs, making off with that, along with sneakers, cigarettes and other items.

And they wonder why my bet is "drugs" ...

Couldn't be because those AK-47ish things are the tool of choice for individuals involved in that business these days, I guess.

[krispos42]

24. That story is a refreshing change

Not that I'm approving of the crime, but people that post the results of a Google news search for crime-related AK-47 news typically post excerpts from a bunch of stories that follow this formula: "Police arrest (man/men) during (domestic dispute/police raid/traffic stop) and (find/seize) an AK-47".

So the gun's inert in a corner or closet or trunk but somehow is mentioned in the story as relevent.

[iverglas]

27. yeah

So the gun's inert in a corner or closet or trunk but somehow is mentioned in the story as relevent.

It just isn't the least bit relevant that people engaged in the drug trade (the most common circumstance in which AK-47ish things are found in closets or car trunks), or people with an obviously violent bent, have a penchant for those AK-47ish things ...

[krispos42]

29. That's exactly the impression that's given

The only time a gun is mentioned by make is if it's an AK-47-pattern rifle. Everything else is described in a generic fashion. But an AK-47 is a headline-grabber, whereas a bolt-action hunting rifle (long-range sniper weapon) isn't.

At some point it become a self-reinforcing loop.

[benEzra]

33. Ah, no...

It just isn't the least bit relevant that people engaged in the drug trade (the most common circumstance in which AK-47ish things are found in closets or car trunks)

Ah, no. The most common circumstance in which "AK-47ish things" are found in closets (or gun safes) and car trunks is (1) lawful ownership, since they are EXTREMELY popular rifles in this country, and (2) transporting them to and from shooting ranges.

So far this year, I've had my AK in my trunk dozens of times, too (I shoot competitively and recreationally with it, which is greatly facilitated by, you know, transporting it to the shooting range) and haven't dealt drugs even once. Imagine that. And (gasp) it's been in my gun safe, too. OMG. Does that mean I'm a drug dealer and just don't know it?

or people with an obviously violent bent, have a penchant for those AK-47ish things ...

What about all those people without an "obviously violent bent," namely 99.99% of civilian AK owners?

I've so far avoided so much as a fistfight (outside of martial arts classes) in my 38 years, and my primary rifle is a civilian AK. Several of my coworkers own them, all nonviolent individuals with squeaky clean records.

And the AK's straight-stocked cousin, the SKS (same caliber, same rate of fire, often confused with civilian AK's by the gun-404 media) is the most common centerfire rifle in U.S. homes.

[iverglas]

38. you try so hard

but sadly, there's nothing wrong with my short-term memory, despite the dose of Ativan I am now labouring under the effects of.

I was responding to this:

people that post the results of a Google news search for crime-related AK-47 news typically post excerpts from a bunch of stories that follow this formula: "Police arrest (man/men) during (domestic dispute/police raid/traffic stop) and (find/seize) an AK-47".

So you're the one being irrelevant here:

Ah, no. The most common circumstance in which "AK-47ish things" are found in closets (or gun safes) and car trunks is (1) lawful ownership, since they are EXTREMELY popular rifles in this country, and (2) transporting them to and from shooting ranges.

"Found"? By whom? Were they missing? Was a search conducted?

Or are you equivocating?

Le stylo se trouve sur le bureau. The pen is on the desk. The pen "is found" on the desk.

The things you refer to were not FOUND in the sense that the things being discussed here WERE FOUND.

The reference here was to things FOUND when there is reason to be looking for something, and they are what whoever is looking for something finds. They are FOUND in the possession of drug dealers, violent assholes, and their ilk.

They may also BE in the possession of any number of perfect gentlemen and gentlewomen. But there you have yourself a conversation entirely other than the one you inserted your comments into.


...or people with an obviously violent bent, have a penchant for those AK-47ish things ...

What about all those people without an "obviously violent bent," namely 99.99% of civilian AK owners?

Uh, what about them? Was somebody talking about them?

What about people who cause car crashes when they drive dangerously? We don't need to worry about them and their driving practices because 99.99% of the motoring public drives safely? So -- we don't need any speed limits? No laws against drunk driving, even. A majority of drunk drivers never kill anybody.

I'd just love to know which deep dark place you pulled that 99.99% out of, btw.

Fact is that not you and not anybody has any clue what any of those 99.99% get up to when you're not around. Not getting caught is not evidence of not doing, I'm sure you do understand.

[benEzra]

44. I wasn't responding to his post; I was responding to yours.

I was responding to this:

people that post the results of a Google news search for crime-related AK-47 news typically post excerpts from a bunch of stories that follow this formula: "Police arrest (man/men) during (domestic dispute/police raid/traffic stop) and (find/seize) an AK-47".

I wasn't responding to his post; I was responding to yours, to wit:

It just isn't the least bit relevant that people engaged in the drug trade (the most common circumstance in which AK-47ish things are found in closets or car trunks), or people with an obviously violent bent, have a penchant for those AK-47ish things ...

The overwhelming meaning of "found" in that grammatical construction is in the sense of "exist(s) at that location", not "are located as the result of a search". If that's not what you meant, then thank you for the clarification. So you would admit, then, that the vast majority of AK's in closets and car trunks in the USA are NOT indicative of criminal activity, then?

I'd just love to know which deep dark place you pulled that 99.99% out of, btw.

Ownership statistics (inferred from BATFE production data, cumulative) compared to FBI homicide, robbery, and LEOKA stats, and also informed by the the FBI Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Survey numbers, which identified (among other things) rifles possessed by criminals at the time of their arrest, by caliber.

AK's are extremely common in U.S. homes, and as I have pointed out elsewhere, more Americans own "assault weapons" in general than hunt. Yet the government data sets very, very low upper limits on rifle misuse, which is no surprise given their lack of portability.

Fact is that not you and not anybody has any clue what any of those 99.99% get up to when you're not around. Not getting caught is not evidence of not doing, I'm sure you do understand.

Unless AK owners are vastly more intelligent than the population at large (which as an AK owner I might grant, if you'd like), one can take people caught committing crimes while in the possession of AK's as a representative statistical sample of people committing crimes while in possession of AK's.

Since AK use in crimes in which the criminals are caught is very, very low compared to the number of criminals caught, it follows that AK use in crimes in which the criminals are not caught is also very, very low compared to the number committing crimes. That's basic statistical sampling.

Unless, of course, all AK owners are geniuses and are as a result much less likely to get caught than other criminals.

[gorfle]

46. Bwahahahah, you go, Ben!

BenEzra is the broadsword of firearm truth. Cutting through the bullshit like a hot knife through butter.

[iverglas]

47. blah blah blah

me: It just isn't the least bit relevant that people engaged in the drug trade (the most common circumstance in which AK-47ish things are found in closets or car trunks), or people with an obviously violent bent, have a penchant for those AK-47ish things ...

The overwhelming meaning of "found" in that grammatical construction is in the sense of "exist(s) at that location", not "are located as the result of a search". If that's not what you meant, then thank you for the clarification. So you would admit, then, that the vast majority of AK's in closets and car trunks in the USA are NOT indicative of criminal activity, then?

No, the "grammatical construction", besides being meaningless (every sentence in which the word "found" is used is a "grammatical construction", for pity's sake) has nothing to do with this.

The CONTEXT is the issue here. The items referred to as being "found" in the passage I wrote were found when a search was being conducted. Not "are found in" as in "exist in", "are situated in". "Are found in" as in "are found by somenoe in".

I know it, you know it, Santa Claus and all his elves know it.

Attempts to "prove" that I said something false, by equivocating on the meaning of a word I used, are funny at best and ugly at worst.


That math test I just took was a bitch.
-- You stole a math test??
-- Do you have a dog licence for that math test??

and so on.


Unless AK owners are vastly more intelligent than the population at large (which as an AK owner I might grant, if you'd like), one can take people caught committing crimes while in the possession of AK's as a representative statistical sample of people committing crimes while in possession of AK's.

That doesn't even make sense. "Representative statistical sample" how -- demographically? in terms of age, sex, race, income, community size, political party preference ...? That's what "representative sample" means.

What you're really trying to say is that the numbero of people caught committing crimes = the number of people who commit crimes.

I'm sure all the merchants who leak merchandise out the door in the hands of shoplifters, of whom they catch but a small fraction, will tell you you're speaking nonsense.


And hey, you keep on pretending that a drug trafficker who owns an AK-47ish thing, or any other firearm, that has never been fired or even pointed at anyone is not USING that firearm to commit crimes.

There are quite a lot of things that people really just would not do if they did not have something like that in the trunk or the closet. You know it, I know it, and the tooth fairy knows it.

[benEzra]

51. Don't grok statistics, much?

And hey, you keep on pretending that a drug trafficker who owns an AK-47ish thing, or any other firearm, that has never been fired or even pointed at anyone is not USING that firearm to commit crimes.

There are quite a lot of things that people really just would not do if they did not have something like that in the trunk or the closet. You know it, I know it, and the tooth fairy knows it.

And why, exactly, do you think that the criminals who are caught using them aren't a representative statistical sample of those who aren't caught using them, in terms of the handgun/rifle distribution?

I have never claimed that rifles are never misused, just that such misuse is exceedingly rare compared to misuse of handguns, knives, and other weapons. That claim is backed up by comprehensive FBI crime data going back decades. You seem to want very badly to believe otherwise, and I'm not sure why since you aren't exactly a handgun fan.

[iverglas]

60. and exactly why would you claim I think something I never said?

And why, exactly, do you think that the criminals who are caught using them aren't a representative statistical sample of those who aren't caught using them, in terms of the handgun/rifle distribution?

What I'm looking for is some numbers you didn't pull out of your bum. Maybe that's plainer.

And once and for fucking all, I am not talking only about CRIMINALS WHO ARE USING THEM, I am talking about criminals who ARE IN POSSESSION OF THEM.

Not: bank robber who gets caught vs. bank robber who doesn't get caught.

But: individual involved in pattern of criminal activity, often associated with drug trafficking.

If you have some statistics in that regard, feel free to offer them up.

Maybe you really do think that they are in possession of them because they look so fine above the mantel.

I actually think they are in possession of them because they believe that they facilitate their criminal activities, by ensuring that they do not come up against rivals / debtors / creditors / interferers without something they can use to protect themselves / their product / their turf / their financial situation.


Of course, if you've ever heard me suggesting that handguns should be readily available, do point me there too.

[benEzra]

30. Nope, unless they keep them for decorative purposes...

Couldn't be because those AK-47ish things are the tool of choice for individuals involved in that business these days, I guess.

Nope, unless they keep them for decorative purposes, since civilian AK's and other rifles are used in lethal criminal violence at far lower rates than their prevalence in U.S. homes would otherwise suggest.

Rifles of all types combined not only kill fewer Americans than bicycles, they kill fewer than shoes and bare hands, despite their popularity. Primarily, of course, because of their severe lack of portability compared to handguns; they are excellent for defense-in-place, but are not particularly practical for taking out and about.

Of course, someone who uncritically accepts what the Associated Press considers nationally newsworthy as a statistical sample of actual events might be forgiven for believing AK's are the "weapons of choice" of criminals, but the FBI aggregate data, the BATFE Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Survey, and the FBI Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted data all put the kibosh on that hypothesis.

[iverglas]

39. is your name spin too?

civilian AK's and other rifles are used in lethal criminal violence at far lower rates than their prevalence in U.S. homes would otherwise suggest

Ah, it's that "lethal criminal violence" that nobody was talking about again.

[benEzra]

45. Lethal criminal violence is the worst-case for rifles.

Rifles are used in nonlethal violence at even lower rates than for homicide.

The reasons should be obvious if you think about it. Most forms of robbery require portability and the ability to effectively use the weapon one-handed, hence the almost exclusive use of handguns in robberies, followed by sawed-off shotguns. Rape at rifle-point would be almost impossible unless it is a rare multiple-perpetrator attack. And so on.

Admittedly, rifles are probably right up there with handguns in the "criminal shooting of road signs in the woods" category, and are probably as highly represented in the stats of personally owned rifles confiscated when a nonviolent criminal is busted for a felony (whether that felony be check kiting or pot possession/distribution) as their ownership rates would suggest. But as far as weapons actually USED in crimes, lethal or nonlethal, they are consistently among the least misused of all firearms in the United States, at rates far below their rate of ownership, as you well know (even if you sometimes pretend otherwise for the sake of argument).

[iverglas]

48. AD-47ish things in the news with drugs

From a quickie google news search, mainly from late November 2008; just a few of the things FOUND in the possession of, but in many cases never USED by, people engaged in committing crimes.



http://www.greeleytribune.com/article/20081209/NEWS/812084676/1002/NONE&parentprofile=1001&title=Evans%20shooting%20was%20a%20gun%20vs.%20AK-47

A weekend shooting on the outskirts of Evans turned out to be a case of a handgun against an AK-47 automatic rifle, and, according to court records, the AK-47 lost.

A shooting victim told investigators this weekend that he was shot because he got into a confrontation with a drug dealer who pulled a gun on him. Phillip Romero said he grabbed an AK-47 from a nearby table, and the weapon misfired. That’s when Romero was shot three times.

Weld County Sheriff’s spokeswoman Margie Martinez said Monday the gun was a “knock-off AK-47,” which means it really wasn’t an automatic rifle, but it was made to look like one.

... Phillip Romero, 33, admitted he went to the building Saturday to buy drugs. An argument exploded into gunfire, and he was shot three times. Police are looking for Nick Label, 23, who is wanted on charges of attempted second-degree murder.


http://www.startribune.com/local/stpaul/34887074.html?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUoaK7D_V_eDc87DUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

Three generations of family members live in the house on Concord Street in St. Paul, and the grandmother made it clear to all: No guns allowed, said her daughter, Michelle Olson.

... Alfredo Gutierrez-Gonzales, 19, who was dating Olson's niece, brought the gun to the house, authorities say, and after struggling to load it, shot MacKenzie in the head, according to a second-degree murder charge filed against him Friday.

... The complaint gives this version of events:

Gutierrez-Gonzales was on the family's front porch, where he often slept when visiting, struggling to put a magazine into the semi-authomatic AK-47, a weapon that is legal to own. He had brought it to the house, he told police, after he received text messages from friends living there who said they feared the house was being targeted for a drive-by shooting.

A male resident, identified as "J.A.E.," told police that he was on the porch, too, when Gutierrez-Gonzales gave him the weapon to see if he might have better luck inserting the magazine. The effort failed, J.A.E. said, "because the frame of the gun was messed up or bent."


http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20081204/NEWS01/81204002/1002/NEWS...

Two Rochesterians today are facing felony charges after drugs and illegal weapons were found in a man’s city home.

Rochester Police Officers Aaron Wilcox and Matt Kline headed to 43 Ontario St. just before 12:30 a.m. today, to investigate whether someone was selling narcotics from the home, said Capt. Todd Baxter of the Rochester Police Department.

While outside the house, the two uniformed officers saw someone throw two weapons — a loaded AK-47 assault rifle and a loaded semi-automatic pistol — out a second-story window, Baxter said.

... Officers recovered both weapons outside the house. They also located 62 grams of crack-cocaine and $11,000 cash inside 43 Ontario St., Baxter said.


http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20081126/CRIME/81126016

A brief investigation led to an arrest warrant for Robert Mount, 47, that was executed just after midnight Wednesday. On Tuesday night, Woodbridge police learned there may be a "large amount" of weapons in his home, Captain Robert Hubner said.

Eight members of the department's Special Investigations and Narcotics Unit, along with two patrol officers, descended on the Bedford Avenue home at 12:01 a.m. and recovered several hypodermic syringes, Hubner said.

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 ammunition for all of the weapons, he said.

... Mount faces drug charges, along with weapons charges for unlawful possession and for unlawful possession as a convicted felon, Hubner said. He has prior convictions in Middlesex County for robbery, criminal attempt and theft, according to state Department of Corrections records.


http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2008/11/25/drugs_guns_confiscated_in_palm_bay_bust.html

A six-month investigation ended with drugs and guns pulled off the streets, and one suspected dealer faces charges.

Investigators called Billy Molina, 34, a mid-level drug dealer, but police said they found not only cocaine, but also multiple guns inside his home on Hobart Avenue, including an AK-47 rifle and a handgun.


http://www.news10.net/news/story.aspx?storyid=50584&catid=2

A Fairfield man was arrested Friday at his home on Matthew Drive where police found drugs and guns, including an assault rifle and body armor.

Ryan Reed, 29, was arrested on possession of marijuana for sale, possession of concentrated cannabis and multiple weapons charges.

"In this case, we found a loaded 40 caliber and an unloaded assault-style AK-47 rifle," said Fairfield Police Sgt. Jeff Osgood.

... "The guns were licensed and I found the body armor in the bushes near my house and I thought it was cool. I don't sell drugs," said suspect Ryan Reed.

Police say the guns were not licensed. Reed is out on bail and was expected to appear in court next week.

[benEzra]

49. Yup. And guess how many people during that same time frame

were busted for drug possession while in possession of handguns, shotguns, and rifles that weren't AK lookalikes. Five thousand? Ten thousand? Twenty thousand?

Quick math question, what's 1% of 5000?

Did you ever take a course in statistics?

[iverglas]

50. uh, yeah

Did you ever take a course in statistics?

A couple.

It was a long time ago, but as I recall, one needs a basis for saying things like 1% of 5000.

Like ... some actual facts ...

[rrneck]

53. Your post sheds more heat than light. Bad, stupid people

do bad stupid things all the time, and through the magic of the internet, they are easily found. I don't see how reducing the civil rights of legal gun owners through the necessary expansion of civil oversight (and its attendant costs) will pay off for society.

It would be about as effective to outlaw droopy pants and bad music.

[iverglas]

61. and I

completely fail to take a point from your post.


It would be about as effective to outlaw droopy pants and bad music.

:shrug:

[rrneck]

75. Well, look at it this way

The debate about AK style weapons seems to be based on little more than an emotional response. We see bad people using something that looks sorta like that doing bad things on TV and in the movies all the time. Out of a laudable desire that we all share to keep people from getting shot, it has become fashionable to associate the use of those weapons with terrorists, drug dealers, kooks, crazies, and conspiracy obsessed right wing zealots and try to regulate them accordingly.

Meanwhile, since weapons that look sorta like that are also seen on TV and in the movies by a minority of idiots who "want to have a gun like the real bad guys" acquire and sometimes use a weapon that doesn't really do them all that much good. But it looks really cool to them, just like their their droopy pants.

The scarier an AK style weapon looks to you, the better it looks to them. But in the end, it is just a rifle that looks scary.

Throwing gas on the fire of emotional response to the weapon by regaling us with tragedies related to it does nothing to get us any closer to a solution regarding how to adequately and equitably regulate dual use technology. Hence, the phrase "sheds more heat than light".

[gorfle]

41. Well played again, sir. n/t.

[Endangered Specie]

57. Just goes to prove my position that guns are tools

and any tool can be used for good or evil, depending on the person using it.

We see the AK being used both ways.

Therefore, law abiding citizens should be allowed their use, and criminals should be arrested and locked away

[iverglas]

62. just a few words on your idol

By Corin Redgrave, about his father Sir Michael Redgrave (father also of Vanessa), who was blacklisted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/jun/28/broadcasting.georgeorwell

Some time in the Easter holidays in 1949, at about the time when George Orwell was sending his list of communists and fellow travellers to Celia Kirwan, my father bought a decommissioned motor torpedo boat and moored it near our house in Chiswick Mall. ... Coming home from boarding school at the end of the summer term, I found the boat was inhabited. Phil Brown, an American actor, and his painter wife Ginny, with their two young children, had converted the MTB into a very handsome houseboat. Were they renting it, I asked my mother? "No," she said, "we've lent it to them. They had nowhere to live."

... My father had signed a manifesto in January 1941 called the People's Convention. It was organised by the Communist party, at a time when the pact between Hitler and Stalin was still in place. It was not overtly a pacifist or even an anti-war document. But it addressed a very widespread suspicion of the government's intentions, and an even more widespread resentment at the lack of provision that had been made for the protection of people in the Blitz.

My father thought it a good socialist document and signed it. ...

Altogether 12 artists, including my father, were banned from broadcasting because they had signed the People's Convention and refused to publicly withdraw their support. Leslie Howard organised a petition. Laurence Olivier rang my father very indignantly to say "I thought this was the kind of thing we were supposed to be fighting against". Forty Labour MPs circulated a letter against the ban. Ralph Vaughan Williams withdrew permission for the BBC to broadcast his latest work. EM Forster addressed a packed meeting at Conway Hall, organised by the National Council for Civil Liberties.

... True, by the time Orwell wrote to Celia Kirwan in 1949 with his list, my father was beyond the reach of his spite. Apparently Orwell's purpose was simply to advise the Information Research Department about people whose patriotism was in question and who therefore should not be trusted as propagandists. ...

--------------

Blair/Orwell was an informer. He ratted out people he thoughout were not patriotic who should not be trusted by the government.

And totally regardless, your cute quotation has nothing to do with present circumstances and is no predictor whatsoever of what Blair/Orwell would have said about them.

[iverglas]

63. "law abiding citizens should be allowed their use, and criminals should be arrested and locked away"

And their dead victims should be raised from the grave, and the victims of drug traffickers should be miraculously restored to health, and communities terrorized by drug trafficking gangs should be transformed back into green and pleasant places ...

Yes, arresting and locking up the criminals is a tool with truly miraculous powers.

And reducing the risk factors for the commission of crimes ... like the easy availability of whatever kind and number of guns they might feel they need in order to carry on their criminal activities ... is something that only freedom-hating ninnies think about ...

[friendly_iconoclast]

65. You yourself posess and use items used by child pornographers to commit crimes

Not just "owned by", or "found in the residence of". They are also used to help incite racial
hatred and distribute violent, hard-core pornography.

Oh, yeah, for now you're a law-abiding computer owner-until you wake up one morning and decide
to post naked pictures of little kids. Or upload a really nasty S&M video. Or post on Stormfront
about how ol' Adolf's concentration camps were just dandy. Perhaps the ability to do so
needs to be taken away from you for the greater good of society.

Yeah, you say you can be trusted with a modem, 1 Tb of storage, and imaging software.
But they all say that, don't they?

So are you going to give up your computer and internet connection because others do
wrong with them?

[AtheistCrusader]

66. Can o' worms comparison.

We could keep going down this road all the way to 'living is the leading cause of death'.

My personal use of my computers and the connection I lease, is subject to a lot more oversight by the ISP and terms of use, than any of my firearms are, so I'm not sure this is a useful comparison.

[friendly_iconoclast]

69. Perhaps- perhaps not

I was referring to all the banging on about all those awful people having Kalash- and AR- variety
guns in their posession, when:

A: They are rarely used in crime (the guns, not the lowlifes mentioned).

B: the vast majority of people that own them don't do anything illegal with them.

C: iverglas (and everyone else here, for that matter), owns items that are used to commit crimes.

Yet no one seriously proposes to restrict ownership of computers w/net connections because
they've been used to commit crimes by others, or the average computer owner *might* do
something illegal with their boxen and so needs to have it taken from him/her for the good of
society.

[AtheistCrusader]

70. I can see both sides of this coin.

I often see people say things like 'these are never used in crime' or similar language, which is dishonest. Better to point out argument from anecdote, a logical fallacy, and leave it at that.

Expanding the issue to freedom of speech, and obscenity, and other crimes doesn't really get us anywhere.

[iverglas]

72. "They are rarely used in crime"

And you feel free to keep on saying that.

I'll probably get bored with saying THEY ARE VERY COMMONLY OWNED by people engaged in ongoing serious criminal activities who plainly regard their possession of them as important to their ability to continue engaging in those activities.

But you can just say "rarely USED IN CRIME" as if that somehow addressed the point.

[iverglas]

67. I'm sure you meant to say something intelligible there

but damned if I can figure out what it was.

[friendly_iconoclast]

71. OK- you posess items of the sort that have been used to commit crimes

"items" being a computer with an internet connection.
"crimes" being posession and dissemation of child pornography- and, in Canada, violent pornography
and/or incitement of racial hatred.

Now, you may not have done any of these things (and the vast majority of people w/ a Net-connected computer have not and will not), but others have. And as long as you posess said computer, the potential for you to do so remains.

So, it needs to be removed from your posession for the good of society, just like all those firearms mentioned in this thread.

[iverglas]

73. uh huh

Yes, that's a truly brilliant analogy you have constructed there.

Not.

I mean, the economy would collapse if those "assault weapons" were taken out of circulation in the US. Just as it would if personal computers were taken out of circulation in Canada.

And just for starters. One could go on. And on. In fact, I'm sure even you could.

There really is a point at which an analogy becomes just a basket of mixed fruit.

[Endangered Specie]

68. Shall we try to avoid appeals to emotions...

"Yes, arresting and locking up the criminals is a tool with truly miraculous powers."

Well, yeah it would, it doesn't work now because the American justice/prison system is a joke, we lock up non violent drug offenders and in order to make room release the violent ones! A good deal of crime in this country is committed by repeat offenders, which is why we need a national three strikes law.


"And reducing the risk factors for the commission of crimes ... like the easy availability of whatever kind and number of guns they might feel they need in order to carry on their criminal activities"

Gun laws that restrict ownership and possession do NOT reduce the availability of illegal guns, Im sure you are aware of the number of illegal guns in Mexico despite its particularly strict gun laws. In India guns are quite prohibited but that did not stop the Mumbai attacks etc...

Even if it did, other weapons are freely available, such as knives, which in England it seems knife crime has skyrocketed. If you try to take the knives away they will either use illegal knives (they aren't terribly hard to make, just ask a prison guard) or something else.

I guess I believe in cutting off the criminal's supply buy cutting off the CRIMINAL rather than his tools. Seems alot easier to me. IF you are as concerned as I am over murderous gangs and drug traffickers, whats wrong with locking them away forever (or, my preferred solution.... execution).

Incidentally, legalizing and taxing recreational drugs (much like we do with alcohol and tobacco) would cut into the illegal traffickers' business, whilst boosting gov't revenue at a time when they could use the $.

[iverglas]

74. Nooooo

it doesn't work now because the American justice/prison system is a joke

Actually, it doesn't work ever because punishment comes AFTER crime. In case you hadn't noticed.


A good deal of crime in this country is committed by repeat offenders, which is why we need a national three strikes law.

Ah, you seem to subscribe to the individual/general deterrence theory of punishment.

Too bad it's been pretty thoroughly discredited by anyone who actually knows something, when it comes to the people we're talking about.

Then of course there are the problems that would arise with things like "three-strike laws", in genuine rights-and-freedoms-loving civilizations that guarantee things like due process. I thank my stars I live in one of them.


I guess I believe in cutting off the criminal's supply buy cutting off the CRIMINAL rather than his tools. Seems alot easier to me. IF you are as concerned as I am over murderous gangs and drug traffickers, whats wrong with locking them away forever (or, my preferred solution.... execution).

I tell ya, I wouldn't know where to start. I can think of where you'd find an appreciative audience, though.

It won't be in a genuine rights-and-freedoms-loving civilization, sadly.

And if you believe that locking Person A and Person B and Person C up forever is going to put an end to the things they were doing -- that potential profit doesn't abhor a vacuum as much as nature does, and Persons X, Y and Z won't slip right into that vacuum the minute it appears, well, you're the naive one here.


Incidentally, legalizing and taxing recreational drugs (much like we do with alcohol and tobacco) would cut into the illegal traffickers' business, whilst boosting gov't revenue at a time when they could use the $.

Incidentally, I support decriminalization of a whole range of currently illegal drugs.

But if you imagine that the criminal organizations that derive income from drug trafficking aren't going to find some other thing/activity to profit from, you're the naive one here.

The common denominator in all such cases is: they need firearms in order to carry on their activities.

I guess I believe in cutting off the criminals' supply of the sine qua non of the various wars pitting society against criminals: the weapons they need in order to keep up their end of them.

[rrneck]

28. For my part, it was rare good news in the gun/crime debate since

the burglars learned the dangers of breaking into houses and the homeowner learned he couldn't hit a cow in the ass with a boat paddle under stress. And nobody died.