This was all part of a economic embargo not really to stop someone from buying a gun. The Company that supplies AKs among other weapons is the Kalashnikov Concern. The Gun lobby had a big interest in getting them put in the embargo because the Kalashnikov Concern has increasingly been coming out with precision rifles which have gotten pretty decent reviews. The Russians have lately been migrating to smaller rounds such as the 5.45, pricing it aggressively and people liked the exotic feel of a Russian made weapon. With falling gun sales in the US but increasing sales of Russian made weapons it was a priority to the gun lobby to get those off the market. Smoke and mirrors. Yes you do have the right to buy any weapon made anywhere if it falls into accordance with the US Federal Government. I recently added a Walter to my collection. Its a german company. They make a pistol that removes just about all recoil.
If you are infringing on what weapons I can buy, you are infringing on my right to bear arms. Period. You are incorrect.
The gun lobby. Heres the picture...just about everyone that can afford a gun has it. The gun legislation scare along with 2008 election sent gun sales through the roof. When I say through the roof nearly everyone doubled tripped capacity to make them. AR-15 style rifles went from 600-2000 in some cases. Rounds..bullets either sold out as soon as they made the shelves or people were paying 1-2 bucks per round. Anything to do with a pistol, gun, slings, scopes...all sold out. That insanity has leveled down now and is on the downward slope. Sig Sauer and others have actually laid people off...the demand is not there but the demand for Russian weapons are. There pie was increasing while sales for American made guns was tapering. Embargo came up and the K.Concern was added to the list very fast along with other stuff. The only great thing is all the anti gun and regulation attempting achieved nothing but more guns sold in a 6 year period then nearly 100 years of guns. The Feds keep track of Concealed Carry permitting and from 2008 to 2012 time there were more of those issued since they have been keeping track in the 1990s to 2008. So please encourage your elected officals to bring up gun control again legislation wise...all it does double, triple, quadruple sales literally overnight. It never passes, then when its taken to court its usually torn apart.
I see your point but I don't think you want to encourage anti-gun legislation, it might cause more guns to sell but ultimately jacks up price for a while. I took that as more of a tongue in cheek comment.
In most cases no. Out in Cali you cannot remove a magazine from your rifle without a tool now. Mind you you can buy a not yet deemed illegal magnet to by pass this feature. The idea is to slow you down from putting another magazine in it. The gun lobby has not challenged this in court for fear that the Judges might side with them..so the ideology is let the Californians have it. Sometimes lawsuits can backfire.
Do we really need tto get a dictionary or history book in here? "Right to keep and bear ARMS shall not be INFRINGED" its not the right to keep and best swords or muskets, its the right to keep and bear "arms" The reason we have this right is to allow the free people of America to.exercize authority over the government It is The one and only thing preventing another Holocaust As soon as Americans lose their second amendment they will also lost their freedoms and their place at the top of the world "what is a bunny of fish?" - Christopher Brown
No ones infringing on your right to bear arms. You can still go buy rifles elsewhere. Just not the Kalashnikov anymore. It's like banning brawny papertowels. Ain't infringing on anyone's rights to buy papertowels they just don't get that brand anymore. I own guns and am pro gun but.. Gotta widen your visions a little bit in this area. It was a move to hurt/embarass russia. Nothin more nothin less.
No one might be doing it technically as a move to infringe, but regardless it is an infringement. You are the one who is not viewing the whole picture.
Its another small.infringement that makes.guns harder to obtain overall Also this is supposed to be a free market, or so.I thought "what is a bunny of fish?" - Christopher Brown
Ya'll are being silly. The decision to place a temporary embargo on goods from Russia is not an infringement of the 2nd amendment. There are many options to purchase a weapon and there are many of those weapons still available. A diplomatic option to pressure another Country to change their ways that involves slowing economy is not over turned by your desire for a particular model. Get real.
assuming that is the actual reason. What other Russian products were embargoed? "what is a bunny of fish?" - Christopher Brown
These are sanctions against Russia for annexing Crimea. Japan, the EU, and Switzerland have joined in, as well. Russia has responded in kind with sanctions against the countries who imposed sanctions against them. I'd rather live with sanctions, and without Russian products, than go to war with them. We can get our guns and caviar from somewhere else.
It has graduated into the third round of sanctions. Then in a very unpopular move, Russia imposed sanctions on some food imports. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_during_the_2014_pro-Russian_unrest_in_Ukraine
The biggest and far most costly part of the embargo was the removal of US Oil workers and technology for the Russians. They never developed the infrastructure for providing that internally. They sourced it out. They have big bets on oil out of the ocean and are being denied that stopping operations. Russia is a petro based economy and in particular oil has to be a certain price for all of Russias big bets to pay off.
Going through the debate threads I am happy to see most of us not engaging in heated verbal battles Yall carry on now
Luckily, many countries import these styles of rifles. I have 10+ AKs and maybe 2 of them are actually products of Russia. Political chess is LOLZ