I appreciated that article since I have two Saiga rifles, one in 7.62×39 and the other in .308 (7.62×51). These imports help provide “affordable” self-defense in that they are priced about half or less than what the same U.S.-made semi-auto rifles of the same caliber and capacity would cost. And these are NOT “assault weapons” since those are full-auto and thus, for the most part, the only “assault weapons on the streets” are being carried by government agents.
But who would’ve ever thought that it would be imported weapons from Russia that are aiding the American militia to arm itself.
Considering it is the NYTimes, not bad. OK, the author stresses “the gunís violent history” even while noting sellers and buyers stress reliability reputation gained, and mentions that popular Glock is a foreign-owned company but does not mention that those used by our military and law-enforcement are made here in the US, but that is not unforgiveable.
Bias does show (the “civilian version” of an AK “shares many features of military guns” – uh-huh, now name some firearms that do not) bir much less than usual.
Re: “Military guns” vs. “civilian versions”in Boston’s Gun Bible,an excellent work about everything guns by Ken Royce, he writes that if the gun banners really knew anthing about guns, they would be wanting to ban scoped hunting rifles amny of which are much more powerful than most military rifles.