That crappy barrel is probably responsible for many dead
people.
No press on other "as reliable" rifle for simple reason that
they arn't any.
That's not much of an argument is it? By virtue of the fact that
people do get shot dead by the AK does not mean that its crappy
barrel ought to be retained. Not to mention that the sheer number
of AKs in existence makes the probability of somebody getting
killed by it (despite it's flaws) more or less certain. But I
don't think probability is something you want to go into
battle with.
In fact it's very noticable when you are dueling in a
firefight with somebody at 200m and realize that he can hit you a
lot easier then you can hit him.
The AK isn't magically reliabile. It is reliable because it has
a sound and working operating principle that has been co-opted in
many later rifle designs. There is no physical reason why another
weapon design working on the same principle will not as reliable,
or even more reliable.
Of course, it is one thing to form your opinion of a weapon from
the stories you hear about it and actually having the numbers at
hand. I am not entirely sure however how the latest AR designs
that are made to be super-reliable stack up against the AK,
for the simple reason that we don't have the numbers to
ballpark.
FYI, like all firearms, the AK does and will jam, and it does
and will fail at times... there are plenty of factors to
consider, the condition of the weapon, the ammo used and so on and
so forth. While being able to work when coated with rust is a good
feature... I don't think any grunt in his right mind would want to
trust a rusty weapon no matter how "reliable". A single chamber
explosion is all it takes to ruin a day.
AK-47 failure from bad ammo:
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=AK-47+failure&search_type=
