Monday, October 26, 2009

Another Idiot Sticks His Foot in His Mouth on the AK-47

The Medford Mail Tribune is fairly notorious for its anti-gun, anti-self defense, anti-Second Amendment positions. It therefore comes as no surprise that they printed an “editorial” declaring that “AK-47s should be illegal”. The piece (of tripe) by one R. "Andy" Anderson of Phoenix Oregon is a rant that hits all of the standard anti-gun talking points with a healthy dose of ignorance and distortion on top.

Going through the piece point by point:

“As we all know, an AK-47 is a "killing machine" and nothing else! Gun dealers should be prohibited from selling them and should have to divulge where they get them from!”

Technically all firearms are “killing machines” by that definition – from the Brown Bess Musket all the way through Glock pistols and bolt action hunting rifles. The author furthermore clearly has no understanding of the nature of the so-called AK-47’s advertised for sale today. He’s clearly laboring under the delusion that they are fully automatic weapons smuggled into the country. In fact, all AK-47 derivatives sold in the United States are semi-automatic firearms with BATFE approved receivers to prohibit easy conversion to a fully automatic firearm. Furthermore AK-47 derivative rifles in the United States must have a minimum number of U.S. made parts to comply with Section 922(r) of the Federal Code. They are available from several reputable importers and manufacturers in the United States.

“As a veteran of the Korean War, I'm very much aware the damage this weapon can do.”

The AK-47 was not used in the Korean War, though the PPSh was. This seems like a normal “appeal to authority” logical fallacy, but Mr. Anderson only further demonstrates that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

“It's not used for hunting deer, elk or any other game animal that can be legally hunted.”

Actually with a five round magazine the AK makes a very nice deer hunting rifle. However as any student of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Section 27 of the Oregon Constitution is aware, hunting is not the purpose of the right to keep and bear arms. Defense of the self, the state, and liberty are. The AK-47, even in its semi-automatic incarnation, is a solid defensive weapon.

“Most of the people that get their hands on this weapon of mass destruction are crooks, bank robbers, etc., and the police department is totally outgunned by these criminals.”

This whole statement is just factually incorrect from the outset. A 2004 study by the Department of Justice indicates that the impact of the Assault Weapon Ban on crime was minimal, largely because so-called “assault weapons” were “rarely” used in crimes. Furthermore, most police departments are armed with high caliber, high capacity semi-automatic pistols as a standard sidearm. Departments also have access to REAL fully automatic assault rifles which outgun anything a civilian can own outside of a Class III weapon.

He closes with:

“I can't understand why anyone would want to own one, even a collector of guns!”

Obviously “Andy” doesn’t understand a lot of things. He doesn’t understand the law, he doesn’t understand the right to keep and bear arms, he doesn’t understand the difference between a BATFE approved semi-automatic clone and a fully automatic firearm, he doesn’t understand modern hunting, and he doesn’t understand what weapons were actually used in the Korean War (which he allegedly attended). It’s therefore not surprising given the dearth of knowledge he’s displayed in his “editorial” that he wouldn’t understand why someone would like to own one. Speaking as someone who owns several AK-47 clones, I own them for self-defense. I own them for hunting. I own them for target shooting. I own them because they’re rugged, easy to clean, and easy to carry. I own them because the ammunition is generally inexpensive. I own them because they are an important part of world firearm history. Maybe next time “Andy” will educate himself on an issue before writing an editorial... Yeah, right!

Until next time!!!


hazmat said...

Right on, dude. Everything you said in your rebuttal is spot on. Too bad, as the rag this came from probably wouldn't print your response anyway.

Fingolfen said...

Probably not, but someone there will read the letter... and they'll know we're not going to just let them print whatever lies they choose to tell without a response.

Micah said...

Great write up man.

I'm glad you addressed the fact that these 'weapons of mass destruction' are rarely used in crimes.
When I first read the article my eyes were rolling so far back in my head it was hard to continue :)

Bill O' Rites said...

Seeing this kind of crap in the UK media is routine but I guess ignorance amongst those who purport to inform us isn't the exclusive domain of the British gutter press.
Hysterical & inaccurate anti firearms articles were used effectively here in the UK to change public opinion & you don't want that in the US.

Fingolfen said...

I'm sure the Medford paper will drop my letter into the waste basket, though The Oregonian surprised me and actually printed one of my op/ed pieces as a longer letter to the editor. We're trying to keep up the good fight here, I really feel for you guys over in the UK - it's getting downright Orwellian!

Troy said...

Man... I wouldn't mind finding some of these 3rd-world style gun bazaars I keep hearing about in the more liberal media!! Maybe then I could pay some more reasonable prices, not ones so heavily inflated by legislative-driven supply/demand problems!!

Fingolfen said...

Troy - no kidding - that's one of the reasons I have to laugh when I hear about U.S. made "assault weapons" going to Mexico... Jeez, these guys can get the real thing for a fraction of what we pay for the castrated version...