To say I'm unimpressed with the content of this book is an understatement. There are too many technical errors to ignore; it seems that the author and/or publisher failed to have an individual familiar with firearms review the content before publishing. In fact, I'm surprised it was published at all. The writing is mediocre, and reads like a freshman's attempt at writing on a topic they are not familiar with. For a more technical read, I suggest The AK47 Story: Evolution of the Kalashnikov Weapons by Edward Ezell. Or for a better social narrative try AK47: Story of a Gun by Michael Hodges. Skip this book; unless you enjoy using your highlighter to find errors. ( )

A more or less impressionistic and journalistic account of the development and impact of the AK-47 family of assault rifles. The descriptions are vivid, the analysis less impressive. The contrast that the author draws between soldiers who are highly trained to aim carefully and "make every shot count" (as in the United States and other Western armies) and Third World soldiers, revolutionaries, and terrorists who spray bullets indiscriminately from cheap and widely available AK-47s, and consequently kill and wound huge numbers of civilian bystanders, is especially memorable. The author also describes how AK-47s have contributed to huge instabilities in various parts of the world, especially Africa. The author's analysis of how AK-47s have done so is, however, impressionistic and open to question. ( )

Holy smokes.
Ok, I read this. I own an AK-47. Its my favourite rifle, so I wanted to see what he had to say. I almost wish I owned a copy rather than got it a the library, so I could note the errors, but that strikes me as taking too much time. I have no idea if Kahaner is pro- or anti-gun, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. Whats worth noting is how bad his information is, and the assumptions he makes. I don't care which he is, what I care about is accuracy.
He is very American in his outlook that firearms cause wars (like they cause crime, like pencils cause mistakes). He blames the AK for contributing to global conflict, news flash, take away the firearms and give warring people sticks, and they'll use them. Violence occurs regardless of technology.
He continuously refers to the AK as "cheap", quoting prices of $400 to $1400. That isn't cheap, that's more than my AR-15 (The most expensive rifle I own) cost!
He claims that the possession of an AK turns anyone armed with one into the equivalent of a highly trained, well equipped, physically fit, modern soldier. The first thing I thought when I read this was "Cool, I own an AK, so according to Kahaner, now I'm SAS!" This is of course, absurd. The only thing possession of a weapon makes one is armed.
His technical errors abound, often confusing weapons, calibers and other features.
He employs rhetoric (speech designed to evoke an emotional response, rather than convey information). "How are our soldiers/policemen expected to be able to stand up to the overwhelming firepower of the bad guys?" Shooting back is an excellent start-thank you LAPD and the West Hollywood bank robbery.
He claims that the AK changed how wars are fought, that with the introduction of the AK, wars now became unlimited in scope. Pre-47 wars were fought between professional soldiers, post-47 they are fought between paramilitants and civilians. All wars are ultimately fought against civilians.
He blames the AK for the ethnic cleansing in Africa: Rwanda, Zaire, South Africa, Kenya, Somalia, Liberia. It isn't the weapon that changed the scope of these wars, its those who choose to pursue civilians as legitimate targets.
These are all wonderful reasons for me to dislike this book, but what it all boils down to is Kahaner's belief in avoiding personal responsibility for one's actions. That some other device can always be blamed for unacceptable behaviour. Feh!

I do X because (I own a rifle, I'm an alcoholic, I have ADDS, I was abused as a child, I'm hispanic...). Whatever the excuse. Whiny sissies. I do X because I decided to do it, if it was the wrong thing to do, then its MY mistake. ( )