See my post #11. He is in his 60's; former Navy and a retired Omaha cop. He is one of our published authors so everyone looks to him for gun information. I'm kind of a thorn in his side, since I do some shooting. Not that I'm any kind of expert in gun handling.
Consider this about his "clip" comment. An AK-47 chambers a round through the bolt latching forward (from its rear position), pushing a round forward and up out of the magazine into the chamber. Once the bolt is seated all the way forward, behind the chambered round, the magazine can be completely removed without affecting the chambered round at all.
When the magazine is empty, it does not move. One has to push the release button for it to drop out of the lower receiver. There is no visible change in its position at all between its empty and full (or chambered and unchambered) positions.
As a matter of fact, there is generally (barring mechanical problems with the weapon) no way to seat a magazine in a different position in the weapon at all. If there were, then this second position (which, supposedly, does not chamber a round) would be considered a defective weapon, unreliable for use.
If the bolt is locked back, it generally means that the magazine is empty (though still inserted) and the last chambered round has been fired. the bolt locks back in order to facilitate insertion of a fresh magazine and immediate chambering of another round. One might be able to see if the bolt were locked back, but NOT if the weapon were actually pointed at you.
Bottom line - the other author's scene and his defense of it are decidedly wrong.
BTW - I resigned my Army commission in 1997, and was a range safety officer for my battalion in Germany. I offer this only to provide evidence of some real-world experience in such matters.