Didn't They Learn This Already?

There’s a news article about the shootings in Tyler, Texas last week that deserves some attention.

For starters I'm getting very tired of this. I thought that after the fuss over the "assault weapons" ban that newspapers would have learned that their lack of knowledge about the mechanics of firearms can no longer go unnoticed. At the very least you'd think they'd consult with someone who's actually fired a gun before (on purpose) to get some facts straight. But if they'd have done that then I wouldn't have to waste 30 minutes an hour of my life correcting their errors.

Officials Say Shooter's Weapon, Armor Put Them At Disadvantage

"Law enforcement officers who were outgunned in last week's downtown shootout with a man armed with a semi-automatic rifle and clad in body armor said the incident is a nightmare they hope to never relive."

It'd have been refreshing to see it read like this:

"Law enforcement officers & armed citizens who were outgunned..."

But my breath is not on hold for that.

"Don Martin, Tyler Police Department public information officer, said although the gun is a legal firearm, it can create a serious disadvantage for officers first on the scene.
'For a first-responding police officer going to a situation where the suspect is armed with this type of weapon, it is a definite disadvantage,' he said. 'I as an officer am armed with a Glock 9 mm handgun. He (Arroyo) was armed with a rapid-firing, high-velocity assault rifle that can penetrate my body armor."

Any firearm can create a disadvantage for the first few people there providing the person who has the firearm has the skill, knowledge & intent to create such a problem. You are only outgunned when you miss & your opponent doesn't.

But it is not any more "rapid firing" a weapon than any other semi-automatic out there. A Remington 1100 12 gauge used in a duck blind wouldn't be referred to as "rapid firing" would it? Neither was it an assault rifle. An assault rifle is capable of fully automatic fire whereas the Mac-90 (if that's what was actually used) fires semi-automatic only.

& there are muzzle loaders that can go through the officer's body armor. Its simple physics - a bullet resistant vest is built to stop a certain level of force. Exceed that force & you defeat the vest. Since most vests are rated for some handgun cartridge or another then it's not magic for a rifle cartridge to defeat it. The 7.62x39mm cartridge that the Mac-90 fires is slightly weaker than the .30-30 Winchester cartridge which made its debut in the mid 1890's in lever action rifles.

Now to the reporter's credit he did include some commentary from people who figures the person, not the weapon is to blame. & he even included that Martin did not blame the weapon or its availability.

"Clay Alexander, resident agent in charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives office in Tyler, said the weapon Arroyo used is not illegal for law-abiding citizens to possess.
'If you are a law-abiding citizen, you can purchase these weapons from various locations with the same background check as someone buying a handgun,' he said."

Lesson number one about gun laws; do not rely on the BATFU for advice. (Acronym stolen from David Codrea)

It being a long gun then it's not subject to the same criteria for purchase as a handgun. You have to be 21 to buy a handgun whereas the age is 18 for long guns. It's possible that he just meant the same NICS check was run as was for a handgun (minus the age requirement of course) but considering what side of the fight for freedom he's on I won't cut him any slack.

Now here's the part that'll make you think that weathermen have to live up to exacting standards of factual accuracy.

"A LOOK AT THE MAC-90

The Mac-90 is a semiautomatic Chinese knockoff version of the Russian-made, fully automatic AK-47.
According to the Web site AK-47.us, the model's name is derived from "Avtomat Kalashnikova, model of 1947."
The AK-47 was designed by M.T. Kalashnikov in the second half of the 1940s, and was adopted by the Soviet army in 1947 as AK and issued to combat troops.
The AK quickly became the most copied weapon of its type because of its reliability in combat situations.
The Mac-90, manufactured by the Norinco Corp., has a 56.16-inch barrel, chromed bore, stamped receiver and trigger.
The gun fires a 7.62x39mm bullet, and is capable of firing 600 rounds per minute with a distance speed of 780 meters per second.
The average cost of a standard 30-round Mac-90 is between $350 and $500.
'The AK-style rifles aren't pretty, nor is their safety easy to operate. But the guns are robust and magazines, parts and accessories inexpensive, making them a good choice for those wanting a hunting rifle that can also serve as a fighting weapon,' the Web site states."

Where to begin?

I'm going to re-post it & take it line by line.

"The Mac-90 is a semiautomatic Chinese knockoff version of the Russian-made, fully automatic AK-47."

True.

"According to the Web site AK-47.us, the model's name is derived from "Avtomat Kalashnikova, model of 1947."

True again, but pay attention.

"The AK-47 was designed by M.T. Kalashnikov in the second half of the 1940s, and was adopted by the Soviet army in 1947 as AK and issued to combat troops."

True. But are catching it yet?

"The AK quickly became the most copied weapon of its type because of its reliability in combat situations."

True.

Now here's the thing - why the history on the AK-47? This section is supposed to be dealing the Mac-90 not the AK. I could better understand it if he was discussing the mechanical similarities & differences between the two but he's giving a basic run down of the military & political history of the AK which has little bearing on the Mac-90.

"The Mac-90, manufactured by the Norinco Corp., has a 56.16-inch barrel, chromed bore, stamped receiver and trigger."

Please someone send me a pic of their AK clone with a 56.16 inch barrel. I've always been fascinated by carbines that have 4.5+ foot barrels.

"The gun fires a 7.62x39mm bullet, and is capable of firing 600 rounds per minute with a distance speed of 780 meters per second."

No. The firearm fires a 7.62 bullet from a 39mm cartridge. 7.62x39 is the cartridge designation not the dimensions of the projectile it fires. The first number (7.62) refers to the projectile diameter. The second refers to the cartridge case length.

600 rounds per minute? From a semi-automatic? Here's a test: grab onto a broom handle & squeeze your finger 10 times a second for 60 seconds. I come up with about 3.5 to 4 seconds to squeeze ten times. Now that's with no resistance like you'd have with a trigger. I assume the Mac-90's trigger pull is around 5 or 6 pounds, possibly more. I'm coming up with 4 to 5 seconds when I dry fire a double action pistol of mine ten times. The trigger pull is a few pounds heavier than a decent rifle's trigger should be but then again it might be the same or lighter as the Mac-90. All that is without recoil which will slow you down & lining up the sights which is necessary if you want to hit anything more than a few feet away. My best guestimate is that with the Mac-90 you're looking at 30 to 45 rounds per minute aimed (probably closer to 20 or 30). Maybe 80 to 90 if you're just pulling the trigger & changing mags as fast as you can. But 600 rounds per minute is a cyclic rate for a fully automatic firearm, not a semi-automatic firearm. & even that is just a rate. With an AK you still have recoil & magazine capacity to deal with so 600 is not humanly possible unless you have a 600 round magazine & arms like a guerilla.

"The average cost of a standard 30-round Mac-90 is between $350 and $500."

It's not a "30 round Mac-90". It's simply a Mac-90. The Mac 90 is capable of accepting 30 round magazines. I'm sure it can accept lower capacity & higher capacity magazines as well. That's like saying your computer has 300 Gigabytes of memory when you're including the external memory cards you can plug into it.

"The AK-style rifles aren't pretty, nor is their safety easy to operate. But the guns are robust and magazines, parts and accessories inexpensive, making them a good choice for those wanting a hunting rifle that can also serve as a fighting weapon,' the Web site states."

I dunno. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure anyone who's used one for defense has thought it was a beautiful firearm. But for the most part true.

Again I must point out that the history of the AK was out of context in this section. If he'd have been discussing the mechanical features of each then I could see it being relevant. That the AK was used by the Soviet Bloc's militaries starting in 1947 has little to do with the Mac-90 being used by a murderer or being available to civilians unless you wish to cloud the two in the minds of people who do not know any better.

Now for the rest of the article:

"Alexander said the search on Arroyo's gun was proving more difficult than usual.
'A round fired from one of the people involved in the shooting actually struck the firearm in an area where the information we need is located,' he said. 'That information is how we trace the history of a weapon. It is taking us longer than usual but we will get it."

That means a bullet dented the receiver where the serial number is. They're trying to trace the serial number back to the dealer who sold it. From there they can pull out the old Form 4473 & find out who the firearm was sold to. If it was sold to Arroyo then that's all they can find out. If it was sold to someone else then to Arroyo I suspect they'll be asking the person(s) a lot of questions. From what I gather Arroyo was not prohibited from purchasing firearms though so the only way I could see it being of any consequence is if the firearm turned up stolen.

Kenneth Dean wrote the article. To his credit he included some quotes from pro-gun people. I assume that he acted out of ignorance rather than malice but I'm wondering why the press in general is so starved for accurate information about firearms? Sure there are some, perhaps even a majority that simply want to push an anti-gun agenda but if they keep relying on information that takes me bout an hour to disprove & you about 5 minutes to absorb then how can they hope to achieve their goals?

I'd like to give Mr. Dean the benefit of the doubt on this one, but too many times I've seen reporters confuse fully automatic firearms with semi-automatic firearms to think it's still unintentional. If I hear back from him I'll let you know.

If you know anyone in the newspaper or televisiontrasde & they tell you they're about to do a story concerning firearms do me a favor & tell them to e-mail me first. It might save what little reputation they have with the gun nuts but most importantly it'll save me precious minutes of my life that I'd otherwise have to spend correcting their errors after the fact.

Posted by Publicola at February 28, 2005 02:45 AM