While it seems some think the mag is a detriment, its really not. You can load/unload/reload the gun quickly, safely, and without fumbling. Something not said for the SKS. I can pop a mag in an AK without chambering a round, and lock the selector, and the gun is "safe". It can be quickly charged if needed, or quickly unloaded if needed, without fiddling.
The mags also keep your ammo secure, and easily accessed. My experience with the SKS and strippers, has not been as positive, especially if you draw the strippers from a chest bag or pouch. The strippers tend to be poorly made, and dont retain the cartridges well, and more often than not, you dont get the full ten rounds in the gun. If they havent already left rounds in the pouch when you try and draw them, they often drop them on the way to the gun.
These are the same reasons I use to show why the AR is a better hunting rifle than a manual action with blind mag well. Therefore, the AK is the better rifle in terms of safety of use and ergonomics vs the SKS.
It IS easier to unload a magazine fed rifle, it doesn't scar the nose on the rounds cycling them all out of the chamber, and there is less chance of an ND fiddling around doing it. Pop the mag, unload the chamber, done.
If the AK and AR both superceded older designs, this is exactly one of the reasons for it - manipulating the weapon is significantly safer. When it comes to ND's in hunting weapons, the one with the bigger negative reputation is the Rem 700 - not the AK or AR. Whether the trigger has problems is much less the point than the fact most users cycle all the ammo through the chamber to unload it. Blind magazine firearms are not as safe as detachable mags.
Now consider the Win 94 and having your hand so close to the trigger when you close the bolt cycling ammo out of it. I own both, it's a messy and problematic issue unloading one. In general practice, I suspect nobody does when faced with a field obstacle like fencing. With a detachable mag, it's not nearly as much an issue.
And yet the knee jerk reaction is to defend the blind magazine gun as "better" because tradition is superior. Not. Bluntly, it's more dangerous and has the track record to prove it. That is exactly why those features were deleted from battle rifle designs, humans make mistakes and ND's will happen in the highly stressed situation of combat.
A good argument could be made for the SKS being more accurate, that goes to the individual gun, not the design. Plenty of highly accurate AK's or AR's are out there. Fact is, the AR has run off the M1's and older guns from Service Rifle because it's easier and cheaper to accurarize, and shoots rapid fire more accurately. <--- Which is another reason the mag fed designs are better hunting rifles. Most now are chambered in intermediate cartridges, which is another bonus with the AK. Lower recoil means the shooter is battered less and more likely not to flinch. That makes them more accurate, and also recover to take another shot more quickly and more accurately. They are subject to less recoil.
Some of us have been saying this for years, the difficulty is that the naysayers have never shot a modern sporting rifle and categorically refuse to admit the ergonomics and safety are superior. Well, if the old guns were all that good, we'd still see old gun designs being issued for mass use by soldiers. Nope. Not happening. Those old guns had flaws and no amount of love for them makes them better, you just accept them for what they are and work around them.
I've proposed a similar test in the past, line up two tables with ten rounds on one and a manual blind mag action, the other with a semi auto sporter and magazine loaded with ten rounds. When the clock starts, load, aim, fire five (5!) rounds, and unload. Score the targets. See for yourself - which is faster, more accurate, and easier to unload?
BTW, you AK guys, try it against an AR, ten mags with one round apiece. When you can beat the AR shooter you know you are really good. It still won't make you well ranked in Three Gun, there are no AK's in the top ranks and there are reasons, like, no bolt hold open or off hand bolt charging.
That's why most of the modern battle rifles now designed use AR control locations - they work better with the human hand and how we do things. That is applying the lessons learned from the older, less well done designs and refusing to make the same mistakes again. That is why modern sporting firearms are better than traditional ones for civilian purposes like hunting, target, or self protection.
It's why we don't drive cars with flathead motors and mechanical brakes, use dial telephones, or wear wool underwear. Things get better and we move on.