Articles by Herschel Smith

Outdoor Life:

After more than a century of flattening the world’s biggest, meanest, and tastiest game animals, the .30/06 Springfield remains an incredibly well balanced, versatile, affordable hunting cartridge. With modern ammo it shoots 100- to 200 fps faster than it used to. If it was good enough to stop lions, rhinos, buffalo, and elephants 100 years ago, it’s probably good enough to stop deer, elk, and moose today.

He makes his case with unction when comparing the ballistics to 6.5 Creedmoor, .270 Winchester, and other cartridges.  The 300 Win Mag comes out on top in just about every category which is expected, but just by a little.

But when comparing ballistics, he looks at energy (ft-lb), and hydrostatic shock is important as well, so I’m not entirely convinced.

My conclusion is that the cartridges are closer than one might think, but one interesting thing is that the 270 Winchester beats the 6.5 Creedmoor in carried velocity at distance, energy, and bullet drop.

While he says makes the case for the .30-06, I might conclude that he really makes a better case for the .270 Winchester.

ZBROJNICE.com:

Portugal has the most restrictive gun laws in all of Europe, apart from the UK. But in several aspects, Portuguese weapons law is more severe and extremely perverse because it has a lot of dubious subjective prohibitions. Therefore, our law is – by far – the worst I know in any democratic country. I believe it violates Constitutional Rights and the basic structure of our legal system that is constructed around the principles of the Portuguese Republic Constitution.

The Portuguese legal regime regarding weapons had a radical change in 2006. Before that, the law was based on a 1949 enactment. This underwent some minor changes in 1975 and later more significant changes in 1997, 1998 and 2001. Although quite old, it was a well constructed legal regime in terms of objectivity, technical definitions, and very well balanced when it comes to rights vs. prohibitions.

In 2003 the Government created a special committee. It’s alleged aim was to simplify legislation regarding firearms and weapons. Then in 2006 they proposed what became known as the new weapons and ammunitions legal regime “Regime Jurídico das Armas e suas Munições”, generally called as “RJAM”.

This new package of laws was a total fiasco, being significantly more complicated than the previous law. It included two major enactments – the base law No. 5/2006 and the sport/gun collection law No. 42/2006. Plus several decrees, dispatches, regulations and a vast multitude of lesser legislative acts.

Just the Act No. 5/2006 alone is more complicated and larger than all the laws that existed until 2006 combined. When gathered together with all the other new legislative acts, things became even more complicated and difficult to understand.

All these problems were aggravated because this new regime was, and still is, based in “legal definitions” and “legal classifications” that have several technical mistakes and are so ambiguous that they can be interpreted in various ways.

Meanwhile powerful anti-gun lobby was seeking further restrictions. And they succeeded. The base law No. 5/2006 underwent a major revision by Act No. 17/2009. Five more amendments followed ending with Act No. 50/2013 that has been the last major change in force until today. Now we are facing further changes in connection with the EU Gun Ban.

Was there any kind of grandfathering for the newly banned items?

No. If you buy a gun in a perfectly legal way and you own it because the law in that moment guaranties that it is legal, there is nothing that protects you, nor your property, if the next day the law changes and the guns you legally bought and own becomes forbidden. You can’t keep it anymore, and if you do, you will commit a criminal offense that is severally punished.

Changes of the original Act No. 5/2006 always lead to a more restrictive regime. Many items that were legal by 2006 became illegal and are now considered “forbidden weapons”…

And there is no end to that.

The EU Gun Ban implementation proposal now exceeds everything we have seen so far in terms of absurd prohibitions, abuse of power, disregard for private property and increase of subjective and dubious prohibitions. It is now being discussed by the Portuguese Parliament.

[ … ]

It also introduced new prohibitions, and changed in a more complex way some legal definitions, all ammunition with expansive bullets became strictly prohibited except the ones used in hunting. A specific example: the prohibition of rifles and shotguns that resemble “war weapons”. Due to that change, several legally owned firearms had to be reclassified from “C class” to “A class” and could not be used any longer.

Those firearms owners had to apply for a different permit that restricted them firearms to what we call “house detention”. That means the owner cannot have any round of ammunition that could fit those guns and the guns must be kept inside a vault or a safe house. Never being able to be used for any purpose than the simple possession inside that specific house, locked in a vault and without ammunition.

Vítor Teixeira’s repeating rifle Sako TRG 42. After 2011 change in Portuguese gun laws, this rifle (according to the opinion of the Portuguese Security Police (PSP) experts) could be classified as a “war weapon”, so Vitor chose to sell it off before the law was approved. Later, some of these where indeed confiscated by the police, but other (this is due to the subjectivity of the law) became – again – class C rifles.

Do read the entire interview.  That Sako is a very nice gun, and between the scope and gun he’s probably got $6000+ wrapped up in that weapon.  It’s now a paperweight because he (or its new owner) has no ammunition – or at least, we are to assume that he doesn’t.

The conflicting, confusing nature of the definitions and the various and sundry ways in which the regulations can be interpreted isn’t a bug – it’s a feature of all good gun control legislation.  The piecemeal erosion of rights is emblematic of what’s happening in the U.S. as we watch.  He said that the most recent gun control regime makes even more weapons illegal, and “there is no end to that.”

No, there never is.  And the Fudds who didn’t care about bump stocks may one day see their bolt action deer rifles locked in gun safes with no ammunition, unable to kill deer, because it’s considered by the controllers to be a weapon of war.

I’ve warned before about classifying guns as weapons of war versus hunting guns, or any other such bifurcation.  The U.S. Marine Corps used shotguns to clear rooms in Now Zad, Afghanistan.  They also used Winchester Model 70s in the initial stages of OIF as sniper rifles.  It didn’t bother them at all that Carlos Hathcock chose that very weapon in Vietnam (before its manufacture was outsourced to Japan, of course).

9mm Glocks, .45 ACP 1911s, bolt action rifles, high quality optics, night vision, knives, shotguns, body armor, and good comms gear are all still in use in the military and always will be (in some form or another).  The controllers think all of that is either a weapon of war or appurtenant to it.

Incremental cooperation with the controllers means gradual loss of liberty.  Compromise is for men who have no principles.  The only mistake the expert made in the responses was in his assertion that anything that is a God-given right can be “very well balanced when it comes to rights vs. prohibitions.”  That’s where all the problems began.

The controllers want to own that purview of mankind precisely because it is domain God has retained to Himself.  The state has set itself up as god, and there is no compromise good enough when the only acceptable sacrifice is absolute fealty.

Elizabeth MacBride:

Shaggy beards are to South Carolina gun shops what man-buns are to Vermont coffee shops. And both places are modern-day town squares, but in different Americas.

[ … ]

As an aside, enjoying the shock value of his statement, he tells me that it’s legal to buy and sell small tanks in South Carolina, too.

Shades of Fort Sumter, I think. If it’s man-buns versus shaggy beards, does the side with the WWI-era tanks win?

I’m not sure what she’s insinuating from the way that question was posed, but she may be too clever by half.

Listen, Ms. MacBride.  The little boys with man-buns don’t want anything to do with those boys with shaggy beards down in South Carolina.

They hunt feral hogs with long knives by jumping on their backs and stabbing them in the gut.  They stay out all night ‘Coon hunting, only to go to work the next day after they’ve had to chase their dogs down.  They can put a 30-06 round on a dime at 100 yards.  They drink corn liquor from a fruit jar, grow their own vegetables, and the man-buns wouldn’t last two seconds with them.

If you know any man-buns thinking of coming down this way, tell them to go buy a frapa-mocha-super-duper-grande and chill for a couple of minutes until they get some sense.

News from South Carolina:

COLUMBIA, SC (WIS) – Brad O’Neil is the part-owner of the Gun Vault in Pontiac.

He said he doesn’t see anything wrong with the renewed push for permit-less carry or ‘constitutional carry’ in South Carolina.

“The Constitution states the right to keep and bear arms. Which in itself means you can keep and bear arms,” O’Neil said.

There are bills filed at the State House that would allow anyone who can legally purchase a gun, to carry it on public places that permit it.

The bills also lay out some restrictions on where a firearm can be carried, openly or concealed. Those include police stations, polling locations on Election Day, courthouses and daycares.

Here we go again.  It happens every year.  The politicians tease this issue, and then it dies in committee.

So what’s going to happen this year?  Does it have a chance?  Will South Carolina finally leave the ranks of California and New York and decriminalize open carry?  It’s way past time, you know.

Via WRSA, this report is interesting and bracing, and I confess it’s a part of history I have never studied enough.

Between October of 1944 and January of 1945, when the Second World War has not yet finished, a military court attached to the Second Polish People’s Army is formed, akin to the Soviets. The court, chaired by a Red Army veteran, Colonel Stefan Piekarski, and under the supervision of Soviet Colonel Aleksander Tomaszewski, condemns 144 prisoners; of them, 61 of them are condemned to death, 43 being executed. Almost all AK soldiers and officers imprisoned in Kąkolewnica are killed in the nearby forest of Uroczysko Baran, shot in the head. The locals hear the shots at night and as a result of the killing, the neighbors of Kąkolewnicy call the place “Mały Katyń” (Little Katyn).

Because they were a threat to communism.  It reminds me of a related comment I saw at a post few days ago.

Yes, that’s true.  That makes some people recoil and back down.  Not fully committed and self-aware communists.  They just say, “precisely.”

News from Kentucky:

The Kentucky House of Representatives has passed a permitless conceal carry bill.

Senate Bill 150, backed by the National Rifle Association, will now head to Governor Matt Bevin’s desk after a 60-37 vote in the House. It allows Kentuckians 21 and older who can lawfully possess a firearm to be able to conceal it without a permit.

Gov. Bevin said Friday afternoon to Gray TV that he would sign the bill.

“It doesn’t break new ground. It simply says that people do indeed have the right to keep and bear arms,” said Gov Bevin. “… For those people who are offended at this idea and don’t like it, there are other places in America where they could live.”

Gov. Bevin also said he is a concealed carry gun owner and that this bill is a constitutional carry bill.

Well, what does he mean by that?  Is this bill permitless carry, or constitutional carry?   Curious, I did just a little bit of research on open carry in Kentucky.

Kentucky law provides a strong background for permitting the open carry of firearms in most places. As such, there is little case law discussing the issue, because simply put, it isn’t illegal to openly carry firearms and the cases the do arise are not litigated to the point that they become case law. Even if an individual is charged, the cases will likely be quickly dismissed and will not remain in the judicial system to become legal precedent.

Because open carry of firearms is for the most part, legal in Kentucky, the statutes focus on concealed carry.

Um … what?  It’s difficult to believe that the government wrote something like this.  In adjacent paragraphs, they wrote the words “simply put, it isn’t illegal to openly carry firearms,” and “open carry of firearms is for the most part, legal in Kentucky.”

My dog could do a better job than that.  Maybe some open carriers can come in and clean this up for us, or perhaps you need to be exercising your right to openly carry more in Kentucky, and perhaps that’s the next confusion the legislature should get cleared up.

It sounds like the congress-critters and state lawyers have been taking drugs.  Somebody do an intervention, please.

News from Russia:

In the Tagansky District of Moscow, the police detained a 67-year-old woman, from whom they seized a pistol with live ammunition. The pensioner bought and stored the firearm illegally, the law enforcement officers established. The Muscovite was released on recognizance not to leave.

“According to the examination, the seized firearm is a Browning pistol and 8 cartridges of 6.35 millimeter caliber,” said the MIA’s Main Directorate in Moscow.

The investigating bodies initiated a criminal case under Article 222 CCRF (illegal acquisition, transfer, sale, storage, transportation or carrying of firearms, its basic parts, ammunition).

A 67-year old woman who likely has no other means of self defense.

Communists will be communists, whether in Russia or the U.S.  Perhaps there is collusion between the Russians and the controllers here in the U.S.?

I found this helpful.

I’ve always pronounced it correctly.  Apparently, folks in the gaming community are a bit taken aback at standard military pronunciation of the word.

Recall I said I had some range time, including with the CMMG PSB .45 ACP?

I kept some of the brass and noticed something for the second time I shot this particular firearm.  Some of the brass has burn marks down one side, like this.

That brass is Federal .45 ACP.  Some of the brass is clean and well-rounded.

That brass is from Double Tap 450 SMC.

Other .45 ACP ammunition I shot didn’t have the burn mark.  I looked more closely at the Federal brass, and noticed what I think is ovality, even to the naked eye.

Given that some brands of .45 ACP can be shot in this gun (along with 450 SMC) with clean results (I also shot a good bit of Freedom Munitions .45 ACP with clean results), I’ve concluded some manufacturers are selling brass that is slightly out-of-round.

I think this is interesting, and I thought I would pass it on.