Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dozens of AK-47 rifles stolen from CA Army base

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
DreamSmoker Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:21 PM
Original message
Dozens of AK-47 rifles stolen from CA Army base
Source: Raw Story

Officials are offering a $10,000 reward for information about the plundering, which occurred July 15 but was only disclosed to the media late this week. An undisclosed number of arrests have been made, and one of the rifles has been recovered.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/31/dozens-of-ak-47-r... /



These are are a much newer version of the original AK47..
Hope San Bernardino LEOs and all Community have a heads up on this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. Since when does regular Army keep a locker full of AK-47s?
They're in Mexico by now. Punka-punka-punka.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistler162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Well better to hear the sound on a training range first
than on the battlefront and not know what they are hearing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. You only have to hear it once.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peregrine Donating Member (712 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Ft Irwin stages opposing forces exercises
Army units go to Irwin where the unit at irwin acts as the opposing force. They use a ton of Soviet/Russian equipment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. In that case, someone is going to be surprised if they try to fire these.
A self-loading rifle (including machine guns like the AK-47) typically require what's called a blank firing adapter in order to fire blank cartridges. Those adapters make the rifle unable to fire real ammunition until it's disassembled and the adapter removed. Try to fire live ammo with the adapter still in place... well, let's just say it wouldn't be healthy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. A Blank Firing Mechanism can be removed within a minute
Edited on Sun Jul-31-11 11:27 PM by happyslug
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS-V7CFM1sjmegP...

The AK uses a gas operating system, just like the M16, M14 and M1 Rifles. Unless someone removed the Barrels and installed Barrels that are blocked internally (Done mostly in movies to give the weapons being used the appearance of NOT firing blanks) most gas operating Rifles use Blank firing adapters like the one above. There are simply screwed into the barrel. The purpose of the Blank Firing adapter is to keep enough gas in the barrel to operate the gas system to load the next round. When Firing live ammunition this is performed by the bullet, and by the time the bullet leaves the barrel, the next round has been loaded. When Firing blanks a Gas Operating system has NOTHING to stop the gas from escaping out the barrel BEFORE the gas can operate the system. The way around this problem is simple, block the barrel, that keeps the gas in the barrel till the gas operating system loads the next blank. The above adapter will do that for any gas operating system.

My point is there is NO need to disassemble any gas operating Rifle (including the AK) to remove a blank firing device UNLESS the blank firing mechanism is part of the barrel. The military not only want people to see how AKs are used, but also fire them so people can see what they can do. Thus I doubt these AKs had any type of Blank Firing Device them used on the M16s, i.e. easy to remove so the AKs can also be live fired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cool Logic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Seals and other Special Forces train with them all the time.
Surely, you can understand the benefit of being able to pick up an AK in the field and use it like it was you own.

After all, it is the weapon of choice for quite a few of the world's armed forces...not to mention nearly all of the world's so-called "evil-doers." :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. LOL at the linked LA Times correction....
"For the record, 5:02 p.m. July 29: An earlier version of this post incorrectly identified the weapons as AK-74 rifles, based on a news release from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Why LOL?
The AK-74 is a Russian design rifle, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peregrine Donating Member (712 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. The 74 is the standard Russian assault weapon
And I believe it uses the 5.56 round (smaller than the 47)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Yeah, I know.
I fired a Czech-made AK-74 when I was in the Army & thought it was a great rifle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. 5.45x39mm
as opposed to the AK47, 7.62x39mm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. Because the LA times *and* the ATF got the model number wrong.
It shows that their fact checking is non-existent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoapBox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. Complete incompetance...that's our military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. No, the military is quite good at defeating a military force,
what it's intended to do.

The civilian part of our government is much more incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cool Logic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. "The civilian part of our government is much more incompetent." You've got that right...
One of the primary ways they demonstrate their incompetency relates to their engaging the US in unnecessary wars.

It's easy to order people to "go get them evil-doers," when you don't have to worry about going with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. How well did the Military did in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 10 years?
Edited on Sun Jul-31-11 11:50 PM by happyslug
Yes, the Military took both Countries within weeks, but most of that was conceded by the Natives of both countries from day one, the real war, the war the COUNTED, was the insurgency in both countries SINCE we took Kabul and Baghdad. How many of our Military Leaders RESIGNED over that war? None. Have we been driven out, No, have we STOPPED the Insurgency in either country by Military means? No (In Iraq we bought off the opposition AFTER they lost their local fight with the Shittes from Southern Iraq). Thus, at best, we have a Military Stalemate in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Clausewitz in his book "On War" points out that Military operations is the use of Military Force to achieve a POLITICAL Goal. What was our Political Goal AFTER the death of Saddam in Iraq or Afghanistan? If you can name it, tell me, I can NOT figure it out. And Democracy is NOT a goal, it is an idea, an idea that can NOT be imposed by Military means (Especially when the Majority of people in both Countries want the US and its allies out of both Countries). What POLITICAL GOAL is being fought for, and thus can be achieved by Military Means in either country?

This type of problem is NOT new, Clausewitz comments about it in "On WAR". When Political goals are NOT militarily achievable, the leaders of the Military MUST so tell their Political Leaders, and if the Political Leaders will not listen, resign. Thus how many military leaders resigned over either war? None, thus BOTH wars and the results of both wars, are clearly the result of the Leadership of the Army and the rest of the Military. This shows the INCOMPETENCE of such leadership.

Just because the Army and the Military can take a Country, does NOT mean you can hold it. You do NOT take a Country unless you can hold it. As a General Rule it takes three times the number of troops to hold a country as it does to take it over, thus even the plans for occupation after the initial conquest was inadequate (And this lack of Troops, is the reason the insurgency on both countries was able to form up and last this long).

Yes, our political leadership is at fault, but to exclude the Leadership of the Military from the same blame, is to ignore Clausewitz. The Generals and Admirals should have resigned rather then get tied up in either country WITHOUT enough troops. That is a Military Leadership error NOT a political error. One the Military leadership could have made clear by resigning, but none of them did for the Military leadership actually agreed with what the political Leadership wanted. Thus this is as much the fault of the Military leadership of the US, as it is the fault of the US Political Leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cool Logic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Don't blame the military for engaging in the types of wars that devolve into stale-mates.
Edited on Mon Aug-01-11 08:59 PM by Cool Logic
For they are not responsible for the illegal abandonment of the Constitution's legitimate processes for declaring war.

You need to lay that blame at the feet of a cabal of Ds & Rs dressed in civilian attire.

The power to declare war was vested in the Congress to ensure a rational contemplation of the grievances, as well as the projected cost of lives and resources of the People.

Every single time the US military has been ordered into war for legitimate grievances, they have exhibited professional excellence. It's our civilian generals who have subjected our military to the random whims of the the UN, which has them engaged in three undeclared wars in the Middle East.

The American People need to ask themselves a serious questoin: Who should decide the question of whether the US initiates a state of war against another sovereign nation that has not attacked us?

Have we authorized the UN to decide what issues justify the sacrifice of our sons, daughters and assets?

Or should we abide by the Constitution which delegates this decision to the American People's representatives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
12. Unrec for technical inaccuracy. The rifles are AK-74s.
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. They used "assault rifle" properly, so they should get a point for that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muskypundit Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. I think you missed the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #12
23. That's what the ATF said, at first.
It was later switched to AK-47's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DallasNE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
18. An Inside Job
Is my first guess, but by whom. Is it someone acting out on their 2nd Amendment solution? Most of these places are double locked and require 2 different people with keys to get inside. The Army has to know who had possession of the keys so why don't we already have arrests?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crowman1979 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
19. Probably some militia nutjobs with friends in the unit's armory.
Don't be surprised if you see these weapons in the next (insert state here) tea party militia recruitment video.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. Democrats better be vigilant... as bush* would say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
24. How embarrassing. Our military did not secure their own base inside the US?
No security cameras guarding guns on base, ubiquitous everywhere else?

What, no media blitz about this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. Over the last forty years a lot of functions
have been privatized. These range from chow halls (albeit not in Basic).... all the way to medical care (some things are done by civilians, especially state side)... to yes... things like this.

Did I mention supply? I can even tell you who to blame for starting this ball going in a serious manner. One Chenney. Under him (as SecDef for poppy bush) this accelerated to levels that now we are paying for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
25. Inside job -- Rifles don't just waltz off the base without a few people cashing in
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-01-11 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. Probably.
That's where I'd look first were I investigating.

Looks like a Dragonov too. More weapons out in the world aside, this represents a fair amount of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 16th 2014, 04:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC