Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
The range I shoot at does not allow SKS or AK's for that very reason. At least, that's their "official" story. The story I got from an employee was that some yahoo shot a power line with his AK and the electric company would only fix it if the range banned AK's.
And that would then be MY "official" reason for refusing to use their facilities. A monumentally ignorant set of choices from all angles.
But I must say, WOW, what an awesome job of forensic detective work that power company must have done to determine even what CALIBER of bullet damaged their lines, let alone what CARTRIDGE fired that bullet, and HOLY COW, they even managed to extrapolate what KIND OF GUN was used fire the cartridge! They must be very, VERY smart people over there at the power company. Yup. Sure are! Right GENIUSES, all of them! And then they used their legal might to pressure a shooting range to ban THAT SPECIFIC MODEL (ok, so two models) of rifle? Because no other kind would be capable of doing the same... Don't believe all the [poop] you're told. You just stumbled into a bunch of (I believe the slang term is "Fudds") who don't like "'dem high-cap-a-sit-eee auto-matical killin' machines," so they won't let you shoot one at their range.
Back to the question at hand:
A rifle or gun is more than a tool. It is a solution to a problem. The problem is common to all folks wishing to arm themselves (how to deliver a bullet with a certain amount of energy and with an acceptable degree of accuracy) but how each group managed to solve that problem -- and update and refine and develop new solutions as time passed -- has produced a wide variety of wonderful mechanical systems which combine function and art. The weapons of our allies and our (once and someday perhaps, future) enemies are interesting and valuable INHERENTLY because of the imagination, ingenuity, and elegance with which their inventors managed to solve the problem at hand. The quality and capabilities of one gun might make it more interesting than another (e.g.: Springfield > Mosin-Nagant) but they are all worthy.
To a greatly reduced degree, the historical connections that a weapon might make it MORE interesting and worthy of attention, but NEVER less so.
Someone used this gun to kill someone else? Is it still bloody? Did it rust up? Is it damaged? If not, then the old use is completely irrelevant.
Emotional quibbles about "this gun was used to kill Americans, Canadians, Aborigines, aliens, or the Easter Bunny" are just a half-a$$ed kind of superstition.
IMNSHO.
-Sam