Firearm

Friday Firepower – The AK47 and why it became popular

Previous posts about the AK47 are here, here and here.

The Economist examines why the AK47 became so incredibly popular.

MIKHAIL KALASHNIKOV died on December 23rd, aged 94. But his 66-year-old invention, the Avtomat Kalashnikova, has plenty more shots left to fire. Developed in 1947 and first used by Soviet forces in 1949, the AK-47 assault rifle and its many derivatives are now used by the armed forces of more than 80 countries, and by freelancers in many more. No-one knows quite how many are in circulation: 100m is a reasonable guess. As a proportion of all the guns in the world—another number no-one can be quite sure about—Kalashnikovs probably make up more than one in ten of all firearms. Why does an ageing Soviet invention still dominate modern warfare?

The cultural impact of the AK is felt all over the world. Quentin Tarantino’s villains celebrate its appropriateness for “when you’ve absolutely, positively got to kill every [enemy combatant] in the room”. Mexican outlaws boast about their cuernos de chivo, or “goat horns”, the nickname given to the rifle because of its curved magazine. In some parts of Africa, where the gun is seen as a symbol of the ousting of colonial rulers, Kalash is a popular name for boys. Mozambique displays the gun on its flag. In Lebanon, a model nicknamed the “Bin Laden” sells for twice the price of the standard AK-47, because it is the type that al-Qaeda’s former boss was seen toting in some of his videos.  Read more »

“Duck Dynasty” launches its own line of guns

Duck Commander is launching a branded family of shotguns, semi-auto rifles and a semi-auto pistol.

The gunmaker Mossberg has teamed with Duck Commander, the company owned by “Duck Dynasty’s” Robertson clan, to release nine different shotguns, as well as two semiautomatic rifles and a semiautomatic pistol.

Mossberg has begun shipping some of the shotguns to distributors, according to spokeswoman Linda Powell. She declined to name specific retailers that will carry them.  Read more »

As usual media got it wrong

Now the facts are starting to come out we find out that the killer in Washington DC never had semi-automatic weapons at all…he used a pump action shotgun and stole Glock handguns from his victims.

This is why people like Piers Morgan should just stfu.

Authorities investigating Monday’s D.C. shooting spree believe the gunman brought a shotgun, legally purchased from a suburban Virginia gun shop, to the Navy Yard and acquired additional weapons at the scene, according to three law enforcement officials.

The officials said Aaron Alexis of Fort Worth, Texas, a 34-year-old discharged Navy engineer, entered the building with a Remington 870 12-gauge shotgun that he’d purchased last week in Lorton, Va., and was later found with two additional weapons, one of them a Glock handgun.

One scenario authorities were investigating was that he obtained the handgun and the other weapon at the scene, possibly from victims. But officials cautioned the evidence analysis was still very fluid Monday night.  Read more »

Tagged:

Not just the lower receiver anymore, now a whole pistol

The guy behind the 3D printed AR is set to announce more plans for 3D printed gun parts…with up to 16 printed parts…a complete pistol.

The project is progressing very quickly now.

3d_printed_handgun_liberator

Defense Distributed, the pending non-profit that plans to make 3D-printed weaponry available for anyone with such a printer, will release the blueprints for a fully-working plastic firearm next week.

The handgun, seen by Forbes, uses 16 printed parts that are clipped together and can be fitted with interchangeable barrels to fire different-caliber rounds. The only non-printed part needed to fire is a simple nail, which acts as the firing pin.

Final testing for the firearm is still ongoing by the group’s founder Cody Wilson, who said that the plans should be online next week. The Liberator is printed from ABS plastic using a Dimension SST printer from Stratasys – although that company has already refused Defense Distributed the use of one of its printers.

“Everyone talks about the 3D printing revolution,” Wilson said. “Well, what did you think would happen when everyone has the means of production? I’m interested to see what the potential for this tool really is. Can it print a gun?”

Wilson is a legally certified firearms manufacturer after getting clearance in March, and in order to make the Liberator legal the group has added a six-ounce chunk of steel so that it can be picked up by metal detectors – a requirement for weaponry in the US under the 1988 Undetectable Firearms Act.

Uhmmm, the barrel is steel…they don’t work so flash without a barrel. Predictably the politicians are making stupid statements.  Read more »

Click. Print. Gun.

Watch this 24 minute VICE documentary about 3d printing of your own gun and why gun control is now a fantasy:

Cody R Wilson has figured out how to print a semi-automatic rifle from the comfort of his own home. Now he’s putting all the information online so that others will join him.

This is a story about the rapid evolution of a technology that has forced the American legal system to play catch up. Cody Wilson, a 24 year old University of Texas Law student, is an advocate for the open source production of firearms using 3D printing technology. This makes him a highly controversial figure on both sides of the gun control issue. MOTHERBOARD sat down with Cody in Austin, Texas to talk about the constitution, the legal system, and to watch him make and test-fire a 3D-printed gun.  Read more »

Gun Amnesties don’t work

In the the wake of the Port Arthur massacre Australian politicians reacted in a illogical manner and ignored sensible advice. They put in place bans and amnesties to lower the number of firearms in the community. That hasn’t worked out so well…the numbers though are probably suspect because they are from that anti-gun weirdo Philip Alpers:

Professor Alpers said since eight people were killed in Melbourne’s Queen Street massacre in 1987, Australia had run 38 gun amnesties for a combined total of more than 3000 weeks.

This included the 1996-97 national firearms buy-back and the 2003 handgun buy-back, which resulted in 728,667 newly prohibited guns being handed back in return for compensation.  Read more »

Obama is the greatest gun salesman of all time

Obama continues to be the greatest gun salesman of all time. Ever since taking office the sales of guns have rocketed…now his talk of bans and the like are seeing super-profits being made in guns stores nation-wide:

As Washington focuses on what Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. will propose next week to curb gun violence, gun and ammunition sales are spiking in the rest of the country as people rush to expand their arsenals in advance of any restrictions that might be imposed.

People were crowded five deep at the tiny counter of a gun shop near Atlanta, where a pastor from Knoxville, Tenn., was among the customers who showed up in person after the store’s Web site halted sales because of low inventory. Emptying gun cases and bare shelves gave a picked-over feel to gun stores in many states. High-capacity magazines, which some state and federal officials want to ban or restrict, were selling briskly across the country: one Iowa dealer said that 30-round magazines were fetching five times what they sold for just weeks ago.

Gun dealers and buyers alike said that the rapid growth in gun sales — which began climbing significantly after President Obama’s re-election and soared after the Dec. 14 shooting at a school in Newtown, Conn., prompted him to call for new gun laws — shows little sign of abating.  Read more »

Gun Control?

Any comment about about gun control is pretty moot as technology advances.

Just like anti-trust cases against Microsoft in the 90s and legislation proposed to try to control guns will be superseded by technology marching on despite the efforts of legislators.

3D Printing is likely to see an end of traditional mass production manufacturers of firearms.

TechCrunch has a great article about “gun control” and how pointless it is.

If you were to attempt to write a law governing media copyright in 1998, would you attempt to do so without acknowledging the existence of the Internet and compression methods like MPEG-3? Any law crafted under such restrictions would be laughably incomplete.

Likewise, if you were to discuss a law that allows or restricts the creation and distribution of firearms, would you attempt to do so without acknowledging the existence of 3D-printed weapons and the ability to transfer blueprints for them online?

Here’s the problem, though. Like the digitization of music, the digitization of objects, guns or otherwise, is a one-way street. Every step forward is ineffaceable. Once you can make an MP3 and share it online, that’s it, there’s no going back — the industry is changed, just like that. Why should it be different when you reduce a spoon, a replacement part, a patented tool, or a gun to a compact file that can be reproduced using widely-available hardware? There’s no going back. So what is “control” now?

Will ISPs use deep packet inspection to watch for gun files being traded? Will torrent sites hosting firearm files be taken down, their server rooms raided? Will all the ineffectual tactics of digital suppression be tried again, and fail again?

Will 3D printers refuse to print parts, the way 2D ones are supposed to refuse to print bills? Will printers have to register their devices, even when those devices can print themselves? How is it proposed that control is to be established over something that can be transferred in an instant to another country, and made with devices that will soon be as common as microwaves?

Part of the discussion has to be that, government or otherwise, there can be no more control over printed guns than there can be over printed spoons. Regulation or banning of firearms, whether you think the idea is good or bad, will soon be impossible.

Friday F*ckup

The Firearm Blog

This is my kind of screw up. Please dear lord let that happen to me…screw the TV, a SIG716 is going to be a whole lot more fun in the long run:

Yahoo Tech reports on a Washington DC resident who ordered a $400 TV on Amazon and instead received a .308 SIG 716 rifle worth $2,200.

Some people have wondered if the gun was actually an air rifle or airsoft clone of the SIG 716. I think it is probably the real deal. Most companies outsource their warehousing and shipping to fulfilment houses. This kind of error was almost certainly made by the fulfilment house, not the TV merchant, not Amazon and not the gun store. In theory a rifle should be kept in a secure part of the fulfilment house. What must have happened is that this rifle got mixed up in another companies inventory outside the secure storage, either accidentally or on purpose (disgruntled employee?).

Tagged:

What everyone forgets when debating gun control

ᔥ American Thinker

People who advocate gun control, especially peacenik types in New Zealand forget a few things when they advocate gun control:

For the sake of argument, let’s accept the supposition that outlawing firearms would save lives.  Does it logically follow from this that guns should be restricted or banned?

Well, it would certainly save lives and countless injuries if people didn’t engage in mountain-climbing, hang-gliding, motorcycle-racing, trampolining, big-wave surfing, cave-diving, heli-skiing, and a host of other dangerous activities.  And, like guns, knives and baseball bats are common murder weapons.  Does it logically follow that these items and activities should be banned?

The point is that we never treat saving lives as the only imperative when devising policy.  If we did, we’d perhaps consider reducing speed limits on highways to 5 mph, since this might save most of the 43,000 lives lost on the road each year.  Speaking of which, since 40 percent of those deaths are alcohol-related, we can consider resurrecting Prohibition, too.

Now, since gun-control advocates think they have morality on their side, they may want to ponder a question: is it moral to sacrifice 43,000 lives just so we can be free to zip around at 55 or 65 mph?  The answer here is that the safety imperative is balanced against an economic one, in that too much productivity would be lost with a five-mph speed limit.

One of the arguments that people use is that no one needs a gun in this day and age…despite the fact that it may actually be a fun pursuit…like abseiling, rock climbing or base jumping:

But sometimes far more trivial things trump the safety imperative.  No one needs to drink alcohol, go rock-climbing, or play baseball when doing so necessitates the availability of a dangerous weapon.  So, imagine that, we’re actually placing fun and enjoyment ahead of saving lives.  In fact, some among us will even tolerate death on a massive scale if we think the reason is good enough.  An example is when the anti-gun left is willing to accept 1.2 million killings a year through abortion.

So if we’ll accept death through fun, should we question death through the gun?  As with dangerous recreation, the enjoyment justification exists with firearms, too, in the form of target and sport shooting.  As with driving, an economic justification exists in that revenue is collected from hunters and because some poorer rural Americans help feed themselves through hunting.  But there is something here that is a true imperative, one that’s greater than most any other:

Thwarting evil.

Guns are great equalisers. If you don’t beleive me then go hunting in Kaingaroa Forest. Hunters are nothing but polite to each other…the reason is we all have guns and know how to use them…no one gets uppity in the forest.

The apocryphal saying, “God made some men big and others small, but Samuel Colt made them equal,” gets at the point here.  Whether it’s a smaller person or a smaller group, firearms tend to even the odds.  They help create parity, and that’s not what criminals want — they want easy prey.  Thus, like a predator in the wilds that generally won’t attack a creature more than half its size, even if a criminal is armed himself, he’ll be reluctant to tackle a target that can target him back.

Even more significantly, as Prohibition, prostitution, and drugs have proven, illegal isn’t synonymous with unavailable.  So, again, let’s assume that a gun criminalization that left firearms in the hands of a few criminals did save lives overall.  What should we conclude if those armed miscreants could nonetheless ply their dark trade with little resistance?  What should we feel if good people were declawed and rendered powerless to thwart their evil?