Market Watch:

Banks and credit-card companies are discussing ways to identify purchases of guns in their payment systems, a move that could be a prelude to restricting such transactions, according to people familiar with the talks.

The discussions are preliminary but could be deeply controversial. Gun-rights groups have long resisted any effort to monitor which Americans own guns; there are federal laws limiting the government’s use of electronic databases of gun sales.

The financial companies have explored creating a new credit-card code for firearms dealers, similar to how they code restaurants, or department stores, according to people familiar with the matter. Another idea would require merchants to share information about specific firearm products consumers are buying, some of the people said.

They’re driving us towards a cash-based exchange for firearms and ammunition.  It should be cash-based anyway, you say.  I understand the sentiment.  Without cash to back up credit cards, you lose the credit card.  Besides, that’s poor form.  A man always honors his obligations.

But there is more to it than that, and you know it.  Even if it’s a firearm that you hold on 90-day lawaway with the local gun shop, you seldom make all the payments in cash.  Even if you do, you seldom carry around enough cash to buy a firearm outright.  Most of the time, you float it with a credit card or ATM card until the next day, or the end of the month when you get paid.

Even if you don’t do that, many buyers do.  This will affect the financial health of everything from local gun shops to large firearms manufacturers.  I’ve warned about this before.  In addition to the advice I gave firearms manufacturers – remove all avenues of leverage, get out of debt, and cut ties with corporate America – there is much more than can be done.  Hornady is showing us the way and is an example of responsible corporate support of our rights and liberties (via TTAG).

Today, the State of New York did one of the most despicable acts ever perpetrated by any state by asking New York banks, financial institutions and insurance companies to stop doing business with the gun and ammo industry.

While it may not make a difference to New York, Hornady will not knowingly allow our ammunition to be sold to the State of NY or any NY agencies. Their actions are a blatant and disgusting abuse of office and we won’t be associated with a government that acts like that. They should be ashamed.

I don’t know if it will make a difference or not, but I know what will make a difference.  It would be like trying to herd cats, but if the firearms and ammunition industry could finally avoid the temptation to whore after government contracts, not just FedGov but state, county and local governments too, when they take positions that run contrary to our liberties, it would effectively end this charade in a single day.

So let’s suppose that Daniel Defense, CMMG, BCI Defense, Knight’s Armament, Rock River Arms, FN, Springfield Armory, LaRue Tactical, Ruger, Barrett, Savage and all other firearms manufacturers, refused to sell to governments that took positions like the state of New York where officials were working with banks to effect gun control measures or encourage non-patronage of the firearms community by banks.  Let’s also suppose that ammunition manufacturers – Remington, Federal, Double-Tap, Magtech, Winchester, and others – joined them in refusing to sell ammunition to such entities.  Thus those entities could obtain neither firearms nor ammunition for government officials, including LEOs.

What do you think would be the outcome of such a large, dovetailed response of the community to this overreach and bigotry?  I suspect the bigotry would end overnight.  It would certainly end if they inquired if any of the products were to be used in security operations for Bank of America, Citibank, Amalgamated, Wells Fargo, and the other large operations, and also refused to sell to their security teams.

It’s possible to end this bigotry, it’s just a matter of will and strategy.  We know what to do, it’s a matter of doing it.  You can help by forwarding this article to every firearms and ammunition manufacturer who will listen.  The banks can back down from this war with firearms owners before it is too late and unpleasant things happen.

As for Hornady, I suspect they will benefit immensely from this decision.  If you are a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, straighten up and pay attention.  This is how you do it.  This is how you pay your dues and earn the trust and respect of the community.  The community rewards such trust and respect.

Jon Stokes writing at Politico:

I’m for Second Amendment rights. I am a Texan and an American patriot who hauls my family to church every Sunday in a diesel pickup truck, where I sit in the pew and listen to the Word with a 9mm pistol tucked inside the waistband of my fanciest jeans.

Isn’t this the part where the author inserts the inevitable “but”—as in, “I’m a firm Second Amendment advocate, but … ”? Well I’ve got no “buts” for you, because I don’t need them. I believe there is a way to increase both our individual gun rights and our collective safety, if we can only get gun controllers to quit bitterly clinging to outmoded feature bans and gun registries, and convince gun rights advocates that “liberty” isn’t just about “what’s in my gun safe” but also about being able to exercise one’s full spectrum of Second Amendment rights in every part of this great nation.

The idea is simple but powerful: a federally issued license for simple possession of all semi-automatic firearms. This license would allow us to carefully vet civilian access to semi-automatic weapons, while overriding state-specific weapon bans and eliminating some of the federal paperwork that ties specific firearms to specific owners.

I offer this idea not only because I actually want to live in a world where it, or something like it, is the law of the land, but also because I and my fellow gun nuts are worried that a storm is coming that will sweep away a substantial portion of our gun rights without really making the country safer in return. We’re not even five months into a midterm election year, and 2018 has seen a string of high-profile incidents that have darkened the public’s view of civilian gun ownership: February’s massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, followed by this month’s shootings at YouTube headquarters in San Bruno, California, and at a Waffle House in Nashville, Tennessee. In the aftermath of these killings, we’re hearing proposals for anti-gun measures that we thought were widely considered out of bounds in the gun control debate, like a ban on all semi-automatic firearms, a repeal of the Second Amendment, or even an outright ban on the private ownership of guns. Some of us think this will all blow over, as it always does. And maybe it will. But this time definitely feels different.

Our side faces a potent new enemy in the form of private-sector companies like REI, Delta Airlines, Citibank, YouTube and Reddit, which are taking an increasingly anti-gun stance. My fellow gun owners and I are now concerned not just with the potential erosion of our gun rights at the hands of our government, but also with the erosion of our ability to communicate and to educate about this topic in the online spaces that make up so much of modern civic life.

There is fear, despair and anger on both sides, and neither side wants to give an inch. We seem doomed to fight endlessly over the same handful of half-measures that neither side is happy with. A new approach—a federal gun license for semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15s used in the Parkland shooting and at the Nashville Waffle House—has the potential to make us all safer while offering a net increase in liberty for the country’s law-abiding gun owners.

[ … ]

If you weren’t a license holder, then simple possession of any semi-auto weapon would be a felony.

[ … ]

An initial set of licensing requirements would undoubtedly include having one’s fingerprints on file with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and a thorough background check that screens for things like domestic violence convictions and inclusion in the government’s terrorist watch list (assuming that list has been fixed by adding a way for innocent people to get their names removed). Gun controllers have long desired a national firearm licensing scheme that includes safe storage requirements and a demonstration of basic weapon proficiency; these things would be part of the negotiations. If they didn’t make the first cut, there would be a place to implement them should they gain popular support. Maybe gun controllers could offer the pro-gun side something it badly wants, like relaxing the federal restrictions on suppressors, in exchange for them.

Here’s the best part.  “Jon Stokes is a founder of Ars Technica and a former editor for Wired. He writes about guns and technology for TechCrunch, AllOutdoor.com, TheFireArmBlog.com and other publications.”

So it remains to be seen if he will ever write again for AllOutdoor or TFB, but Stokes has seriously and passionately embraced the dark side.  It may be no accident that he’s done it in Politico.

Only a dolt and simpleton believes things like what he is advocating being an advantage for personal safety.  Only some in the gun community will actually do this, and certainly not criminals.

Second, he apparently doesn’t believe in the predilection of mankind towards evil and wickedness, witness his sophomoric belief in the idea that a national registry will be given up by the progressives, and that we should later (after already succumbing to the wishes of the progressives) be at the mercy of ideas that “gain popular support.”  The Armenian genocide had popular support too.

Third, a fundamental error he makes runs contrary to the intent of the founders.  He advocates centralization of power, which is exactly what the Bill of Rights was intended to prevent (albeit imperfectly).  He we are again at his naïve belief in the inherent goodness of man, whereas Paul advocated a different viewpoint (Romans 3:23).

Fourth, when he considers the effect on public safety, Stokes ignores the biggest effect, which is mass shootings in gun-free nations at the hands of government actors, which in the twentieth century was near 170 million souls.  Jon’s math is all screwed up.

Finally, he actually appears to believe that his gun creds are stamped and sealed because he is a so-called “gun nut.”  He writes for TFB and AllOutdoor.  I too love to talk guns, love to work them, love to clean them, assemble and disassemble them, study barrels and twist rate, study reticle holdover subtensions and scope design, love to build and reverse the process, love to study ballistics, and on the list goes.  Rather like boys working on cars when you could rebuild carburetors with float and gasket kits, change the plugs and ignition wires, and set timing on the points all without the involvement of onboard computers or professional mechanics.

But that doesn’t mean anything more than I’m a gearhead.  Jon’s “gun nut” creds means nothing whatsoever to me, and it shouldn’t to you either if he intends to compromise the observation of our liberties to progressives on a naïve promise of good will.  The second amendment, as I’ve pointed out, is a covenant.  It is an agreement, not the source of our rights to be armed.  Loving mechanics and being a gearhead obviously doesn’t translate to loving liberty or being devoted to doing what it takes to preserve it.

The fountain of our rights and liberties isn’t the state.  It is the almighty Himself who issues forth such edicts, and because He has done so, let no man feel the freedom to whisk them away in panicked compromise because he fears loss.  There are worse things than losing, and worse things than death.  Losses are only temporal, and death isn’t the end.

My hope is that Jon Stokes never again writes another word for TFB, AllOutdoor or any other gun related publication.  To the gun community, Jon’s name must be Ichabod.  He is anathema.

TFB:

Despite the document’s overall upbeat tone, it does not present a picture of a system “ready to field”. The optic chosen for the test was the Leupold Mark 4 2.5-8x36mm variable power scope, part number 60150, one mounted to all 9 weapons via a LaRue mount. This particular opticis a strange choice, being a virtual antique by today’s standards (the optics themselves are leftovers from the Mk. 12 SPR program of the early 2000s), and having a mix of mil reticle and MOA adjustments. This latter feature means that an operator cannot make adjustments in the same increments as what is shown on the reticle.

[ … ]

Reportedly, the reason for choosing this optic (the 3-9 version of which is slated for use with the M38 which descended from this test) was simply that they existed in inventory at the USMC logistics base in Albany, left over from 2000s-era Mk. 12 SPRs. This raises the question of exactly what logistical pipeline the M38 will depend on for replacements. If the Leupold scope cannot be procured somehow, then the M38 as a system is unsustainable at the start.

The appendices of the document indicate that the rifle system is far from optimally reliable when equipped with the tester-preferred KAC sound suppressor. Guns in the “Bravo” test group, all of which were equipped with that suppressor, experienced bolt over base malfunctions indicating an extremely high cyclic rate and marginal weapon reliability in the suppressed configuration.

I looked up the Leupold Mark 4 2.5-8x36mm variable power scope and surprisingly found that it had been discontinued and was unavailable.  From an engineering standpoint, it’s nonsense to assert that the entire system is unsustainable if the scope cannot be procured.  The author goes on to explain that the specification cannot be changed, and that the scope is an integral part of the specification.

This is one reason why our military loses wars.  Logistically speaking, it’s a beast.  Only the brass can override specifications, and then only after being studied, presumably at Quantico.  Again, this is nonsense given that there are so many good options for scopes.  My son had better scopes when he was in the Marine Corps as a SAW gunner and DM in the infantry.

The real problem comes eventually, and it is the H&K gun itself.  You mean that H&K is overpriced trash?  Why yes, I think that’s what we’re saying.  You mean that it’s best not to dick around with the Stoner design because modifications means changes in design performance and unintended consequences?  Why yes, I think that’s what we’re saying.  You mean that there is no real need for a piston gun rather than the DI design Stoner built?  Why yes, I think that’s what we’re saying.

A commenter says this after the issue of the battle of Wanat is brought up.

You mean Wanat where the worst possible tactical decision was made to place a base there combined with the worst possible rules of engagement resulted in a situation where the US Army won the battle anyway while inflicting disproportionately higher casualties on the attacking force?

Perhaps the commenter has read my multiple analyses of the battle of Wanat.  As s brief reminder, the big Army’s idiotic notion of COIN meant that the brass negotiated with the tribes for more than one year on the location of the COP, leaving time for the Haqqani forces to deploy to near Battalion size strength, left OP Topside poorly manned (where the vast majority of casualties at Wanat were taken either at Topside or trying to relieve Topside), deployed men in low terrain and thus didn’t control the high ground, left men without CAS, and deployed in a location not amenable to the logistics chain.  And the kill ratio still favored US forces by a wide margin.

Remember what one military reader told me about this battle.

The platoon in Wanat sacrificed control of the key terrain in the area in order to locate closer to the population. This was a significant risk, and I don’t see any indication that they attempted to sufficiently mitigate that risk. I can empathize a little bit – I was the first Marine on deck at Camp Blessing back when it was still Firebase Catamount, in late 2003. I took responsibility for the camp’s security from a platoon from the 10th Mountain Div, and established a perimeter defense around it. Looking back, I don’t think I adequately controlled the key terrain around the camp. The platoon that replaced me took some steps to correct that, and I think it played a significant role when they were attacked on March 22nd of 2004. COIN theorists love to say that the population is the key terrain, but I think Wanat shows that ignoring the existing natural terrain in favor of the population is a risky proposition, especially in Afghanistan.

Robert Scales will still blame the rifle for the battle because he’s invested in the outcome of the decision.  But the gun was a Colt, and we are all aware that Colt had begun to suffer QA problems by this point because of reliance on military contracts.  When you don’t field your gun to civilians en masse, you are insulated from problems with the system.

Colt was low bidder.  If the gun had been a Rock River Arms, Daniel Defense or FN, the guns would have worked until the barrels melted.  Presumably Scales would still have blamed the gun.

I suppose that the USMC fever dream of a 6.5 Creedmoor rifle or some other new gun won’t happen if they’re having trouble with fielding new scopes to their DMs.

Mark Tapscott:

Virtually everybody in the nation’s capital is waiting either in fear or in eager anticipation for the upcoming investigative report of Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Horowitz is among the most respected and effective IGs ever appointed, but former President Barack Obama, who nominated him in 2011, may consider that decision among the most regrettable from his eight years in the White House.

Here’s why: The Inspectors General Act of 1978 authorizes the IGs and their investigators and auditors to obtain and examine any official document necessary to carrying out their responsibilities in fighting waste, fraud and corruption in government. Presidents appoint IGs — but those IGs report to Congress, making them an important component of congressional oversight of the executive branch.

But a few months before Horowitz was sworn into the job in 2012, Eric Holder, Obama’s attorney general and previously deputy attorney general under President Bill Clinton, gutted the IG act provision that mandates their access to all necessary documents. Holder acted at the behest of then-FBI Director Robert Mueller and others at the bureau.

Holder — who would subsequently be held in contempt by Congress for refusing to turn over subpoenaed documents in the “Fast and Furious” scandal — thus forced Horowitz to request in writing any documents he sought from the bureau.

There then ensued a three-year struggle in Congress and the media that culminated in Obama having no choice but to sign the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016, which removed all doubt about the IG’s access.

During the three years between Holder’s blatant subversion of the 1978 Inspectors General Act and passage of the 2016 law, James Comey succeeded Mueller as FBI chief. He continued, however, to wall off Horowitz’s access to documents essential to doing his job until the new law was passed.

Horowitz has been investigating the FBI’s conduct in its investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server and email system to conduct official business as America’s chief diplomat. He’s also probing the bureau’s investigation of allegations of collusion between President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and elements linked to the Russian government.

In the course of those two investigations, Horowitz has obtained and reviewed an estimated 1.2 million documents. There is an old saying in Washington that “things that go around have a way of coming back around.”

As more facts are uncovered about the lengths to which former FBI Director James Comey, his then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and a half-dozen other pro-Hillary Clinton bureau insiders went to protect the Democratic nominee in her email scandal, the least discussed element is Obama’s role in the affair.

But former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and former U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy make persuasive cases that protecting Obama in the Clinton email scandal was key to the FBI’s clearly bungled investigation.

Remember Comey’s July 2016 nationally televised announcement that he would not recommend prosecution of Clinton despite her “extreme carelessness” in handling super secret classified national security information?

One of the drafts of Comey’s announcement referred to Clinton emails between her and “the president.” But, as McCarthy recently pointed out, “a revised draft of Comey’s remarks was circulated by his chief of staff, Jim Rybicki. It replaced ‘the president’ with ‘another senior government official.'”

Mukasey recently explained on “The Ingraham Angle” why that change made a huge difference in understanding the Clinton email scandal:

“President Obama was sending messages and receiving messages on Hillary Clinton’s private email server. Jim Comey knew that, and when President Obama went on television and said, ‘There’s no issue here, she didn’t really intend to cause harm,’ what he was really saying in essence is, ‘You’d better let her off, because if you wind up accusing her, you wind up accusing me.’

“Comey followed that lead. And the notion that this was somehow something that he had to do for the welfare of the country, there’s a lot of disingenuous claptrap.” In other words, preserving Obama’s “plausible deniability” was priority number one.

Several observations.  First of all, regardless of the involvement of the IG as we speak, Holder and the DoJ still hasn’t been held accountable for Fast & Furious, and probably never will be.  Moreover, we will likely never read all of the documents pertaining to that scandal.  I think Tapscott’s assessment lacks the moderation this fact demands.

Second, if the IG investigation means turning charges over to a court, the progressives own most of the judicial system.  Nothing will be done.  If the IG investigation means turning the findings over to Congress or the Senate, we all know with surety that nothing will be done.  The current Legislative Branch in the main contains the most self serving gaggle of spineless vipers ever to slither the earth excepting the deep state itself (Of course, there are good men like Louis Gohmert, Walter Jones and Thomas Massie, but they lack the power to make a difference).  Finally, many members of the Legislative branch are themselves in the deep state or the coverup (e.g., John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Richard Burr, etc.).

Third, I don’t believe for one second that priority number one for all or even any of their actions was protection of Obama.  Comey and McCabe are attempting to throw each other under the bus, and you must remember that there is no honor among criminals.  Self protection was the goal of their actions, not some sort of honorable, altruistic self sacrifice.  Thus I reject Tapscott’s main presupposition.

However, he has done a good job of connecting the dots.  Read the balance of the report.

David Codrea:

Chances are this will play out for the cameras and be exploited to feed a meme that further smears those opposed to open borders as violent xenophobes and racists. There are those who wouldn’t mind at all if this results in a bit of for-the-cameras violence — or more than a bit.

Global humanitarian crises will not be solved by subverting U.S. law and culturally terraforming the Republic. But the “organizers” have brought things to the point where an honest, humane desire to solve the plight of such people is used against those who would help, meaning there are those who are cynically exploiting “refugee” pawns and domestic useful idiots to advance a political agenda.

Well, there is such a thing as useful idiots, and many Americans are part of that group.  They’re watching sports and nighttime sitcoms and occasionally the news about the poor folks who just need a little helping hand because they “come for love.”

The globalists know what they’re doing, though.  They want population replacement and it’s happening before our eyes.  At least for this highly publicized event, some of the people associated with the caravan of illegals have already crossed into the U.S.

But this is a small group.  What about the hundreds of thousands per year not publicized?  I get it, the publicity around this is being used to form a narrative.  But the real narrative is occurring every day, and America is recklessly sleepwalking into oblivion and historical irrelevance.

Ammoland:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has awarded Vista Outdoor a contract to supply FBI and other Federal Government Agencies with a high-performance Federal Premium 9mm handgun training round specifically designed to support their mission.

The IDIQ (indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity) contract, which has four option years, is for up to $19 million in 9mm handgun training rounds.

The FBI employs about 35,000 personnel.  Assuming that 20,000 of them are armed agents, that’s approximately 950 rounds per agent.

Read it all in the context of the FedGov being at war with the American people.

I did an initial review of the CMMG .45 ACP Guard, with more to come.  It has an 8″ barrel and classifies as a pistol because it has an arm brace rather than a stock.  I liked the weapon, and in fact will be using it as my primary home defense gun (with EOTech and tactical light and pressure switch attached).

I don’t like the idea of a shorter barrel, but CMMG apparently knows that there is a market for it, and has come out with a version of this with a 5″ barrel called the Banshee. I appreciate reader Ned Weatherby sending me this video.

This reviewer, Lone Star Boars, had a suppressor on it as well as a thermal scope.  I like the can with its quick-connect design over the flash suppressor.  CMMG makes it for their weapons and sells through Silencer Shop.  I am told by CMMG that the buffer kit he used was for their Ripstock Assembly, which I don’t have, and that my gun doesn’t need this kit to run 450 SMC.

A couple of comments.  This is impressive performance.  However, gunners simply must deal with the notion that YouTube is dead.  This video has all the appearances of being a hunting video, but with one complaint it will be taken down by Google because of the presence of guns.  Watch the video while it’s still up.  But we simply must move on from YouTube.  To us it must be dead.

I found the gun as pleasant to shoot as he did.  I put 300 rounds through mine the first time, he put 500 through his.  I could have put a 1000 rounds and still been fresh, but that gets expensive, even with ball ammunition.

Roll Call:

If Democrats control the House in 2019 they would quickly schedule floor action on gun violence prevention, protections for “Dreamers” and infrastructure, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday.

“When we win and we take over in January, some of the issues that will come up soon are the issues we are asking the speaker to take up now,” Pelosi said, naming those three issues.

Speaking during a town hall event with students at Georgetown University, the California Democrat several times used phrasing that suggests she’s not thinking about “if” Democrats retake the House but “when.“

She’s right, I’m certain, it’s not if but just a matter of when.  And they’re not even waiting until they have a democratic president.  They want it now.

What do you think will happen if the democratic house hands Mr. Donald “Ban the bump stocks take the guns first” Trump a spending bill with gun control attached to it?  For the answer, consider what he did when a republican congress did that very thing with CDC spending for “gun studies,” support for a bump stock ban and Fix-NICS.

Citylab:

This month, the South Carolina House of Representatives made it clear that they don’t want anyone’s hands on their guns—not national leaders, and certainly not local ones. To keep Washington’s interference at bay, representatives introduced a bill that would let the state consider seceding from the country if the federal government were to start confiscating legally purchased firearms. But they also launched an inward-facing attack, introducing a “Second Amendment Protection Act” that would enforce extra punishments on cities that act to “restrict [gun] access beyond that which is provided by state law.”

South Carolina already has harsh state preemption policies that weaken localities’ ability to pass their own gun regulations, as do 42 other states. So why is it passing a new one?

The answer may lie in a bold piece of legislation passed this December by the city of Columbia, in what has become the most recent manifestation of a city-state battle over guns—waged while the federal government sits most of it out.

[ … ]

To challenge these sweeping allowances, some cities are quietly—and elsewhere, loudly—pushing their own gun reform agendas. In March, Lincoln, Nebraska, followed Columbia to become the second city to ban bump stocks. (City council members called the ban a largely symbolic move, but one that brings them closer to becoming a safer “city of law and order.”) And on April 3, Deerfield, Illinois passed a bill prohibiting the possession, sale, or manufacturing of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines—to the dismay of the NRA. Gun owners in the city have until June 13 to get rid of their assault rifles, or face steep fines.

Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin will take the helm of the U.S. Council of Mayors as president in May, and has already expressed a commitment to making city-level gun control a priority. He’s been strategizing with mayors from Little Rock, Arkansas; Chattanooga, Tennessee; and Orlando, Florida, which just voted to join the lawsuit against Governor Rick Scott over preemption. “I think you’re going to see an interesting, thoughtful wave of policy-making [next year],” said Benjamin. “Creative policy-making, and litigation strategies that will allow us to do our jobs.”

Hey, it’s almost as if there is no more South and the culture has gone.  And the American culture has completed fractured into a million pieces.  And families are far-flung, and there is no national recognition of liberty and rights, much less state or even city, with whomever wants doing whatever is right in his own eyes.

And its almost as if America is a disaggregated collection of disparate, unconnected and unrelated self-serving entities vying for position and power, as if the only thing left is family (if we can bring them back together), community and tribe.

I wonder just how that happened?

American Rifleman:

Beyond increasing on-target energy, the additional velocity greatly enhances the ARX’s terminal effect. “The fluted design of the ARX bullet is quite amazing, as it operates on the principle of fluid dynamics rather than hydrostatic shock,” explained Schultz. Molded into the projectile are three distinct flutes that, as the bullet penetrates soft tissue (and fluid), transfer the forward energy laterally. The fluids, spinning at around 120,000 rotations per minute (r.p.m.), are forced in an outward direction at upward of two times the speed of the bullet itself. “A new phenomenon has been realized,” Shultz said. “NovX can achieve breaking the liquid sound barrier, actually causing a sonic boom inside whatever water-based material it may encounter—water, clay, gel, flesh, blood, et cetera.”

The rest of the article is interesting, but testing on the round thus far lack field data from hog hunting, deer hunting, etc., and the ammunition also lacks convinced buyers.

I had missed this from Ammoland a few days ago when Glen Wunderlich wrote on NovX ammunition in .450 Bushmaster.  His concluding paragraph[s] is this.

The experiment concluded with a search for what remained of the two bullets. The recovered Inceptor made a violent entrance and completely disintegrated to its final resting place where only a tiny fragment of the original projectile was found – not even enough to bother weighing! On the other hand, the Hornady Flex Tip was peeled from well over 4,000 layers of paper, weighed 170 grains and had mushroomed to about 50-percent more than its original diameter of .452 inches, although the copper jacket had separated from the lead core.

The conclusion is that velocity and energy are only important if they can deliver a better wound channel and the less-expensive Hornady ammo and its Flex Tip design provide a much more appropriate transfer of said energy for a big-game hunting round.

No offense to Glen, but I think he’s utterly missed the point.  It isn’t the design of the NovX round to disintegrate in order to “deposit” energy.

I’ll grant the point that one has to think differently in order to understand what’s supposed to be happening here, but this round was designed using CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics).  The flutes in the round accelerate liquids and other material in the direction of its path by virtue of twist, so it would be contrary to the intent to disintegrate (i.e., it would fail to perform its intended function of imparting energy by virtue of its design if it shattered).

But what I would like to see (I hinted at it above) is field tests using the cartridge.  Anecdotal data.  Yes, anecdotal data is perfectly admissible in logical discourse.  Induction cannot prove a point, but it sure can disprove it.  Show me a 500 lb. hog taken with this round.  Or better yet, invite me to this hunt and let me take the hog.

Prior:

AR-15 Ammunition And Barrel Twist Rate

Considerations In Selecting AR-15 Ammunition

Small Caliber Lethality: 5.56mm Performance in Close Quarters Battle

More On 5.56mm Ballistics

Oversimplifying Ammunition Ballistics

Pistol Ammunition Ballistics Part 2

New Ballistics Gelatin Tests At Ammunition To Go