Couple things:

1 - the SKS import ban was enacted by Bush 1

2 - police reports indicate that the rifle used was not a SKS but was an EAA Saiga 7.62, which is built on a sporterized Kalashnikov action that lacks feed ramps (i.e., doesn't take AK mags).

Even Fox News botched this on SU 11/28 bigtime.

One of their commentators noted anyone walking into the woods with that sort of gun was intending to kill people.

The idiocy!

Meh. Maybe they should ban all semi-auto rifles, for all the good they do me. I just spent 4 days in the woods of Northern NH with my Rem 7400 and didn't get one opportunity for a buck. Any chance that I would have had better luck with a bolt-action?

I kid, I kid.

When I speak with people about the absurdity of the AWB they are surprised when they see a picture or description of a 7400 or similar firearm. My rifle doesn't differ much from an SKS besides looks and perhaps magazine capacity. So what does this tell us about the AWB? Dumb law drawn up by dumb people.

The only reason to ban guns like the 7400 is weight. That damned thing gets heavy after a long day in the woods!

FYI, if the guy was using a Saiga, then it was likely chambered in .308 Winchester.

Saigas come in 7.62X39, 308 and 223. And the shotgun versions come in 20 and 12 guage.

The SKS is a "precursor" to the AK-47? That may come as news to Mr. Kalishnikov, I suppose, that he copied his revolutionary rifle from someone else.

Kalashnikov did copy portions of Simonov's SKS (the sights, gas system, and some receiver similarities), so it would hardly be news to him, eh, Andrew ?

Words fail me to describe how despicable Rand's statement is:
Even though the 1994 law was easily circumvented by the gun industry
Uhh, in any other context, wouldn't we call that complying with the law? Despite the VPC's wishes, the AWB--bad as it was--did not contain a "and also don't do anything that the VPC might object to" clause.

Hello,

I have a really basic question about "myth 1" discussed above. Does the design of the SKS allow the shooter to shoot additional shots more quickly than if it were not "semi-automatic"? Roughly speaking, how many shots per minute could someone get off if the rifle is "automatic" vs "semi-automatic" vs "manual"?

Thanks,

Bill

What everyone seems to miss is that the assailant was trespassing. He was on THEIR land. Somehow, this was missed by the major media and even this website. The guy was a trespassing murderer. Fortunately, he is now under lock and key where he belongs. He won't kill anyone else, unless they're behind bars with him.

Bill Trippe,

To answer your automatic versus semi-automatic versus manual question:

Automatic weapons are capable of firing from mid-hundreds of rounds per minute for infantry small arms (which is what we are discussing), to thousands of rounds for modern multi-barrel gatling guns, to an Aussie weapons system (Metal Storm) that can fire literally a million rounds a second.

Semi-automatic weapons fire only as fast as the user can pull the trigger. For most weapons and their operators, you are talking only 30-60 rounds per minute. Technically semi-autos can fire faster than their operators. People can only squeeze the trigger so fast for so long.

Some manual firearm designs are almost as fast as semi-autos. Pump-action weapons in particular can achieve these high rates of fire if someone is practiced. Lever-actions are only slightly slower.

Bolt-actions are capable of 15-30 rounds per minute, but generally don't have large enough magazines to make this practical in operation.

Even single shot designs can fire 15 rounds with practice.

Oops, typo in above. Metal Storm fires a million rounds a minute, not a million rounds a second.

Of course, if you are the target, I don't think it much matters after the first millisecond.

Also the last line should read:

Even single shot designs can fire 15 rounds a minute with practice.

All of this doesn't matter, however. Any of the firearm actions mentioned above could have perpetrated the Wisconsin shooting.

Massed targets at close range in an open field are sitting ducks for any weapons technology developed in the past 100 years.

Hi Confederate,

Thanks for your explanation.

So it sounds like, as a practical matter, manual firearms are not significantly slower than semiautomatic. I guess, then, it comes down to the size of the magazine to figure out, as a practical matter, how many "shots per minute" someone can fire.

So my next rookie question! Do "semiautomatic" firearms, such as the one in question here, tend to have larger magazines than manual action firearms?

And the size of the magazine is one of the things that is regulated, is it not? And the recent expiration of the "AWB" also means certain magazines are now allowed that weren't?

(I am guessing, too, that magazines differ from rifles to handguns.)

Sorry for all the basic questions!

Bill

So my next rookie question! Do "semiautomatic" firearms, such as the one in question here, tend to have larger magazines than manual action firearms?

It depends on the specific firearm. Generally speaking, semi-autos will hold more rounds, but they generally have detachable magazines, which come in varying sizes.

And the size of the magazine is one of the things that is regulated, is it not? And the recent expiration of the "AWB" also means certain magazines are now allowed that weren't?

*Was* one of the things that was regulated, yes. However, hardware manufactured before the ban was still legal to possess (and buy, and sell) during the ban (the restriction was on manufacturing [or importing] more of them, not having, buying, or selling), so it's misleading to say they are 'now allowed'. They've always been allowed, it's just that when supply was limited due to the AWB, prices went up.

On the size of SKS magazines: don't most states regulate how large a magazine can by used by hunters?
I believe I read Vang (the shooter) had a 20-round magazine, which I can't believe would be legal for hunting deer and would be considered excessive, almost weird, by most traditional hunters.
I like the idea of regulating magazine size for hunting (why not five rounds, max?), but not generally outlawing larger magazines, partly because it would be practically impossible, and partly because it's fun to plink away with a 50-round mag at the junkyard hunting rats, or just shooting targets... let's be free.
This Vang apparently is the son of the famous anti-communist Hmong general who remains the most famous Hmong in the U.S. .. His SKS is probably an original taken from a Chinese soldier fighting with the Cong.!!!

rosignol answered all the questions Bill Trippe asked very well, but I would like to stress that the assault weapons ban did not effectively ban any guns commonly used in crimes, and it did not make these firearms more difficult to obtain, nor did it make magazines for these firearms more expensive.

Interestingly enough, the ten-round magazine limit had an interesting side effect.

Handgun manufacturers, no longer competing to see how many rounds they could stuff in a handgun magazine, instead tried to see how small and light they could make a handgun that carried the 10+1 limit.

The net result was much smaller, lighter, much more concealable handguns that gun owners would actually carry on a more frequent basis.

When this practical reality combined with many more states allowing the concealed carry of firearms by civilians, violent crime rates dropped dramatically as criminals decided confronting a potentially armed opponent wasn't worth the risk.

Violent crime rates dropped because of the 1994 Crime Bill, just for reasons quite the opposite of those who wrote this shoddy piece of legislation.

This is part of the reason Handgun Control Inc. lost all credibility as an organization and had to reform as the equally doomed Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence. As credible research shows, gun control does not equal crime control, and in fact, the opposite effect is shown. When civilans are armed, criminals commit less violent crime. This is a simple statement of fact, not an opinion. Google "John Lott" and "Gary Kleck" if you have any questions.

As far as assault weapons and hi-cap magazines go, I personally feel (and think I have proof to show) that these are exactly the kind of military-capable arms that the Founding Fathers most had in mind to protect with the Second Amendment. Read more here if you are interested in my thoughts on that subject.

"Myth two" in the Capital Times piece flat out lies about the facts on the ground.

• Myth Two: When people are well armed and trained to use their weapons, they can protect themselves against gun violence.

In fact, the group of "hunters" was not armed. Only one of them had a rifle, and Vang took him out first. See ABC news, which reports:

"Authorities have said there was only one gun among the eight hunters."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=277478

The Capital Times editorial directly misrepresents the facts, describing the victims as armed:

"The victims in Sawyer County had access to guns and knew how to use them. Most of the dead had long experience with their weapons. But they were not prepared for a confrontation with a man who was ready to kill and was carrying a semiautomatic weapon."

When did the victims have "access" to their guns? Before they went out without them? People who didn't pick up from news stories that only one of the hunters were armed (a fact that some stories did not report) will get a wrong picture of the crime from this disgusting misrepresentation. Editorials are different than news stories, but that doesn't give editors license to lie about the facts.

Thanks for the link Jeff. Nice job on the gun-ban loonies too.

Regarding winning the fight in the war of words, we've been playing defense for far too long. The Brady Ban Bunch, et. al. have succeeding, in many areas, in equating guns=evil, not just "assault weapons". I wish I know how to turn that around, but I do know it's an uphill climb.

In regards to the design of Gospodin Kalashnikov, he actually adapted a John M. Browning design from around 1910. Just a superficial glance at the Remington Model 8 and Model 81 will shed a bit of light on the ancestry of the AK-47. What Kalashnikov did was adapt the long recoil operated Remington Model 8 to gas operation, using elements similar to the SKS (but simplified, for example the bolt carrier and piston on the AK is one piece, instead of two on the SKS).

The AK should be a decent gun, since it was essentially designed by John Browning.

That Hmong guy reminds me in some frightening ways of some of the people some of my cousins grew up with. (No, I'll not be more specific than that.)

I'm talkin' Southern, here. What we have here is an Oriental Redneck, who thinks it's perfectly OK to hunt on any land anywhere, for the same reason a dog licks his balls. This is why we have badass Game Wardens in the Southern States. I was talking, once, to a quondam Sgt. of Marines, former cop, current lawyer, running for Sheriff of the county I lived in, who recounted his terror at being accosted by a Mississippi game warden. Those Wisconsin wusses did not understand what I tell my kittycat every time I toss him out at night, viz. "Be careful out there; there is an endless supply of bad humans."

Wisconsin wusses?