The Gun

1st saw an AK late 66 at Ft Bragg. had asked to look at Stg 44, foreign wpns section/SF. M/Sgt Scoggins said "Take it apart" Looked at it and in 30 seconds figured out how. Saw one jam in ,Nam, 67/68. Magazine 1/3rd full of clay consistency of plasticine. If the VC had had time or presence of mind to swish mag in water for 15 or 20 seconds AK would have functioned. Carried one my last 6 months in Nam. Saw a SEAL with a Stoner 63 in the LMG set-up, would have been a much better rifle for US troops. Carried FN C1A1 4 years in Canada, then M-14-2 years in US, liked FN but heavy. M-14 heavy and a complicated delicate deer rifle compared to FN and AK Have studied and handled military sidearms almost 60 years, this the most in-depth and intellectualy honest book or study I have seen. Also does superb jobs on the history/politics of the AK and the psychological things one go,s thru if their weapon is trustworthy or NOT trustworthy.

This is a journalist's history of the AK-47 and related automatic firearms. Chivers, a former Marine and New York Times Moscow bureau chief, writes about the Gatling gun, the Maxim machine gun, the AK-47, and the M-16. His account is non-technical and full of historical gaps, but informed by a real understanding of firearms. The book's central firearm interest is the AK-47 (with later variants AKM and AK-74). The other firearms are discussed for contrast: the Gatling is the multi-barreled, hand-cranked, gear-driven precursor to the single-barreled, fully automatic, recoil-driven Maxim, which is followed by the shoulder-fired, gas-actuated, piston-driven AK-47, which is then mismatched by the non-piston, gas-actuated, gas-driven M-16.

Chivers' interest is not in the history or technology of firearms but in the sociopolitical background to their development and use. He is writing as a journalist, always looking for the bad news, the political controversy, and the personal conflict. He spends a lot of time on the story of Kalashnikov and his role, both real and for political propaganda, in the design and development of the AK-47. Chivers' coverage of the M-16 is on its terrible failure in Vietnam and the politics behind the egregiously slow correction of its design faults.

His acknowledgements section is eighteen pages long. This is a very well researched book, but it cannot be stressed enough that it was written by a journalist with a journalist's concerns. The good news is that Chivers is also a former Marine Corps infantry captain and he knows firearms: he knows a semi-automatic from a machine gun, and an assault rifle from a commercial AR15. In fact, the book explicitly avoids the topic of present-day Police State aggression against our fundamental right to own robust, effective, self-defense firearms. He points out early in the book that the AK-47 is a machine gun (and thus a real assault weapon, not a semi-automatic lookalike) and so "largely removed from the main disputes over how to define and legislate the right to bear arms in the present day." (18)

The book is labored and a real trudge to read through. The author never really states why he is dragging us through the details. If he is attempting to "set a mood" it is of tedium. And, the author also makes some patently false statements. A prime example of this being the origins of the terms "Assault Weapon" attributing it to s nebulous reference to the German term "strum gewhar" saying it is a translation. This is pattently false as the translation is "storm rifle". His other details and history are fairly accurate but do not support his contention.

That Chivers is in love with Socialism and especially Communism is obvious in his blatent statement that the AK could only come of the "postive" properties of Russian Stalisnist Socialism / Communism.

He does suggest an interesting idea that may have some merit -- that idea is that the AK was an integral aspect of Client State Warfare. He is presumtious to claim this was the intention from the start for the development of the weapon.

All in all -- it's worth reading. But the reader must be ready to slog through a lot of trivial information for the few nuggets offered. And the overall thesis of the work is highly questionable.

The gun does get around to covering the development of the AK47, but not in technical detail, and its almost as an afterthought of the writer. That said the book is AN EXCELLENT history of modern military guns and their evolving development which created the platform for the AK. The writer also details the US military's negligent, arrogant, and ignorant non development of an assault rifle and the subsequent failures, shortcomings and resultant cover up of the M16, which resulted in the deaths of many young soldiers in Vietnam. Not that the Pentagon would ever err again (F35) and waste 600 billion dollars (to date).

While I expected the author to start into the AK story on page one, it comes about half way through, but weaves a tail unknown to me regarding automatic weapons development which is a natural build up to the AK. This history is beneficial to helping the reader grasp the why of the AK, and the true genius and robust simplicity of the weapon which has killed more individuals than any other rifle in the history of mankind.

A better read than I expected, even as it covered ground not expected.

Let me start by saying that I am not a historian, nor do I have an in depth knowledge of the history of firearms development.

I thought this book was good at giving you a base knowledge on the development of machine guns for uses in war since the Civil War. He doesn't give great details on every machine gun developed since then, but gives you a brief history about the development on the most popular machine guns since the Civil War, and also talks about who and where they were manufactured.

The only downside to this book for me was how long the chapters were. I think the chapters could have been shorter, but I was so interested in the topic that it didn't slow me down. I can see how some people might lose interest with the long chapters. This is the only reason why I gave it a 4 star rating instead of 5.

I am sure there are historians out there who think this book is not worth your time, but like I said if you do not have any knowledge on this subject and you want an entry level book to teach you a few things then this book will suit you just fine.

Enjoy!

Chivers' story of the AK-47 is a must read for gun nuts (like myself). The story is written in an epic sort of prose that tells the tale of an iconic firearm, its predecessors, and its less successful contemporaries.

An excellent book that is really three books in one. As you read it you will see what I mean.

The first book is the history of automatic firearms from the Gatling to Kalashnikov's AK. It is interesting that Browning's firearms are almost never mentioned, which is an incredible oversight as his (Browning) inventions have had and still have profound influences in the world of firearms.

The second book is the history of the AK with focus on the politics and policies. This is not a reference for gunsmiths unless you are interested in knowing this side of the story.

The third book is an expose on the AR-15 (M-16) and the author tells it like it is. The filth of politics gone bad in OUR nation.

I feel that a lot of the complaints of this book fail to understand what this was intended to be. It's not a history of guns in general, it covers the history and heritage of THE gun, the AK-47, the most famous, symbolic, widely manufactured, and evilly used weapon that has ever existed on the battlefield. Chivers is a fantastic author and the details, while tedious at times are given to paint the picture more fully and allow for more in-depth research at the reader's discretion.

I picked up this book as an owner of a Romanian Kalashnikov, an Army Cadet, and an avid firearm enthusiast, but got so much more. This isn't just a book about a piece of machinery, it cannot be told without first telling about society, human nature, military bureaucracy, and the emotions that run throughout. You have to understand soviet values and American stubbornness and how romanticism and bad science can doom thousands of lives. I, at risk of sounding too dramatic, learned so much about leadership, courage, and the importance of skepticism from these pages. Read it now.

C.J. Chivers does an excellent and thorough job of contextualizing the global impact of the AK-47. A quick Google search (even a search of available texts on the topic on Amazon) will lead to a gratuitous amount of sources. I am currently working on a project for my History 499 course (Senior Seminar) at California State University, Long Beach and my topic is the "AK-47, Redefining the Weapon as a Cultural Symbol". Quite frankly, it has been a topic largely ignored by historians (thus giving me some originality); there are myriad sources regarding the AK-47 available. Many of these sources offer little to no original argumentation or presentation of facts and they are frustrating to sift through. They simply attempt to capitalize off of the Kalashnikov brand.

Chivers' work is a refreshing break from the norm. It offers a history of the development of automatic weaponry and places the story of Kalashnikov's invention in that historical context. It also offers a micro-history of Kalashnikov's own chronology in development of the weapon. This book is an excellent read from cover to cover and does not get boring; I recommend this work to anyone that wants to learn something about an important feature of the modern day world (the AK-47).

Furthermore, if anybody is interested in relating Chivers' work to other authors' work, it would be worth your while to acquire a copy of M.T. Kalashnikov's autobiography, "The Gun that Changed the World."

Overall, Chivers' book is of outstanding quality and highly informative--a much needed break from the repetition and dogma of other authors' presentation of the AK-47. I recommend this, highly.

The first half, almost, of this book is pre-WWII. It dewells on the history of automatic weapons development all the way back to pre-Civil War. I found that part of the book less than appealing, but certainly well-researched and no doubt as accurate as this sort of discourse can be.

The second half of the book, a little more than half actually, is fascinating and certainly worth buying the book. It, too, is well-researched and fairly well written. It also jumps around a bit too much for me, but perhaps others have a concentration span longer than mine.

The astounding facts that come out were enough to infuriate me with our own government's stupidity and lack of concern for our fighting men's lives. Seriously, I was so angry with the historical treatise of Vietnam, Korea, etc., I could have spit nickles. We fell twenty years behind the rest of the world in recognizing the value of an assault rifle. As a result thousands upon thousands of our fighting men died needlessly in post WW-II conflicts because of our military's arogance and stupidity, and congress's inaction and indecision. The Secretary of Defense, MacNamera, was no help either.

It's a real eye-opener, amd you won't like what you see. But the book overall is great.