Archive for the 'AR-15s' Category

WRSA sends us an article on Practical AR Enhancements.  Here is an excerpted list of things he discusses.

1. Chrome-lined barrel
2. Bolt parts
3. Buffer spring
4. Lube
5. Enhanced (and more modern) BCG finishes / coatings
6. Optics
7. Trigger upgrades

This is a good list and I highly recommend that you read the entire article, and it reminds me of the still highly read and very important article, “Making Your M4 Run Like A Gazelle,” based on work by Mike Pannone and written by WeaponsMan.

Mike has very extensive comments on the M4 at Defense Review, which stem initially from a discussion of fouling. We’ll just quote his conclusions from this piece below, and also recommend his article on reliability issues, and his follow-up on diagnosing the root cause. Conclusions from what we suppose you could call the “fouling piece“:

Fouling in the M4 is not the problem. The problem is weak springs (buffer and extractor), as well as light buffer weights (H vs. H2 or H3). With the abovementioned drop-in parts, the M4 is as reliable as any weapon I have ever fired, and I have fired probably every military-issue assault rifle fielded worldwide in the last 60 years as a Special Forces Weapons Sergeant (18B). An additional benefit of the heavier spring/weight combo is that it transmits the energy impulse of the firing cycle to the shoulder over a longer duration, lowering the amount of foot pounds per second and dramatically reducing the perceived recoil. Follow-on shots are easier to make effectively, and much faster, especially at 50 meters and beyond.

I reliably fired 2400 rounds (80 magazines) on a bone dry gun, and I would bet that is a lot more than any soldier or other armed professional will ever come close to firing without any lubrication whatsoever. So, disregard the fouling myth and install a better buffer spring, H2 buffer, enhanced extractor spring and a Crane O-ring (all end user drop-in parts). With normal (read “not excessive”) lubrication and maintenance, properly-built AR-15/M4 type rifles with carbine gas systems will astound you with their reliability and shootability.

via The Big M4 Myth: ‘Fouling caused by the direct impingement gas system makes the M4/M4A1 Carbine unreliable.

DTG writing at American Partisan also discusses AR builds, and we’ve seen some good ones come our way.

But I’ll also say that I’ve seen some very bad ones (when I say “seen,” I mean I’ve witnessed the failures first hand when a friend tried his build).  I’ve seen builds that couldn’t get through a magazine without two or three FTF / FTE.  I think this mainly had to do with mixing and matching of parts with the head space not being properly checked (although we suspected it could have been the choice of gas block location).

Colt, with its reliance of military contracts, had begun to have QA problems by the end of their contract, maybe before.  This is so well known as to go without question.  It doesn’t surprise me that guys were having to make modifications and work their M4s/ARs hard to keep them in working order.

But one thing I get with a completed “system” from a reputable manufacturer is tolerance QA and parts compatibility.  Replacing a BCG is nice, but if you don’t check head space, it might not work right.  Either way, relying on Rock River Arms and Daniel Defense (like I do) means that it works straight out of the box, continues to work, and is highly reliable.

I’ll also say a few words about two more things.  First of all, there has been a proliferation of articles on the Army and Marine Corps jettisoning the 5.56mm round in favor of 6.5 Creedmoor, the 7.62mm round for the .300 Win Mag (for DM guns), and a host of other changes.  Some of this will happen (e.g., the MC adoption of the 300 Win Mag), and some will not.  For a whole host of reasons that would take too long to explain, I think it’s highly unlikely that the entire Army or MC adopts 6.5 Creedmoor and throws away the 5.56mm round.  Some of that is just hype and propaganda for the purpose of attention and money.

On the other hand, I’ve never recommended that anyone make the 5.56mm round their only choice of caliber, and everyone should have a bigger bore gun.  If the Army or MC does use 5.56mm less, that’s good for me because it means less competition for ammunition and [hopefully] cheaper prices.  Regular readers know that I’ll never jettison my 5.56mm guns.  They’re too good, too reliable, too pleasant to shoot, and too easy on regaining sight picture from low recoil for me to consider anything else for CQB up to several hundred yards.  If your AR isn’t as reliable as mine are (I’ve never had a FTF / FTE in tens of thousands of rounds and wouldn’t know how to work a forward assist if I had to because I’ve never had to), you need new ARs or you need to work them as described above.  Don’t go budget or “rack” AR.  Spend a little more and get something with good QA and reliable.

Finally, I’ve noted before (comments section) that I don’t like piston guns or dicking around with Stoner’s design.

(1) Piston-device for AR pattern rifles: A stupid, unnecessary, additional failure mode for a gun that does nothing but add weight to the front end of the gun, virtually ensuring that after eight hours of room clearing ops and CQB, the shooter can no longer hold the weapon upright because of the stupidity of the design.

(2) AK pattern guns: A rifle design for conscripts who don’t give a shit about their equipment and refuse to clean it or care for it, that doesn’t shoot very accurately (minute of man rather than minute of angle).

(3) AR pattern guns: Guns made by engineers, for engineers, machinists, gunsmiths, mechanics and professional soldiers who care about precision, fine machines and accuracy (and don’t want to listen to the constant rattling of the poorly made AKs when they shoot them).

(4) Genesis chapter 2: Man is fallen, and it affects the entire universe.

(5) Second law of thermodynamics (based on number 4 above): Entropy always increases. Things get dirty and break. That means pistons in AKs too. People who refuse to acknowledge the 2nd Law also refuse to care for their guns, refuse to clean them, refuse to change parts, and throw their guns around like they are shovels.

Anyone who thinks that a machine can be made that doesn’t break or doesn’t corrode or doesn’t rust or doesn’t need to be maintained, coated, cleaned and replaced is an idiot who doesn’t believe in science. This includes conscripts who want a gun that they don’t need to work on.

Like my son tells me, if you work it, the AR is an exquisite weapon based on an exquisite design.

I’ve got many AR run-to-break and stress test videos linked, but I don’t need to see any of them.  My guns have never failed me.  I also don’t believe in throwing my guns around and abusing them.  I’m a thinking man.  I believe in entropy.

On one occasion a seller was putting a gun back in it’s case for me, and I asked him to use Rem Oil and spray it down.  “It’s Aluminum – it doesn’t rust,” he said.  I replied, “True enough, but Aluminum does corrode, which is a different failure mode, and my hands and your hands have salts on them.  Now, spray the gun down before you box it back up.”

Because I believe in thermodynamics.  Machines don’t run forever without breaking or needing maintenance, and if this fact causes you to conclude that the AR (or any other machine) isn’t any good, then you need to go back and read Genesis Chapter 2.

Military.com:

The lead man tasked by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis with transforming everything infantry and close combat on Tuesday challenged industry and government leaders to put a leap-ahead rifle in his boss’ hands in less than two years — or else.

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Bob Scales was a keynote speaker at the annual National Defense Industry Association Armament Systems forum here, and he didn’t waste any time launching into a takedown of key components that equip the close combat infantryman.

I confess I didn’t know this.  Scales is an imbecile.  Mattis is an imbecile for putting Scales in charge of anything except taking out the trash.  Scales isn’t qualified as a gunsmith, engineer or mechanic to order decisions on cartridge size, type, caliber, or anything else, much less to order that it be a pistol gun rather than DI.

Good Lord.  What an idiot.

So, Scales, here are some questions for you to ponder as your play Napoleon with the would-be weapons makers.  Are you prepared to change not only weapons, but training and doctrine?  You see, the notion of a light, small caliber, automatic gun with high projectile velocity, line of recoil along the axis of the gun, and quick sight-picture recovery, is necessary for the doctrines on which the current militaries of the entire world are built.

They are aided by snipers and DMs carrying larger caliber guns.  So where is the money coming from to change everything?  Why do you want a piston system?  Who told you it is better?  Do you know more than my friend the training NCO in the Army, who told me this?

The Marines have established in their 24-72 hour protracted, static, fire fights in Southern Afghanistan, that three 30 round magazines will do the job, if you have NCO directed, well aimed and properly spotted fire. Shoot from cover, control your security and do not allow an element to maneuver unobserved on your position. Maintain indirect fire back-up for surprises and to exploit enemy error’s. It sounds basic but we (Army) do not routinely practice this doctrine. So we kill and maim our troops because of and regardless of, the grain count of our issue rounds. As you point out.

My friend goes on to explain that the gun isn’t the problem – it’s the shooter.  It’s almost always the shooter.  Hey Scales, do you know more than my buddy does about what’s happened in any theater of conflict in the past 40 years?

Hey Scales, tell me all about the caseless cartridge you want so badly?  I want to hear the engineering aspects of this thing.  I also want to know all about how easy you think it is to keep recoil down while giving the shooter better ballistic coefficient, less weight, more reliability, a cleaner weapon, and instant recovery of sight picture?

Where did you get your engineering degree to insult design engineers like that, you insufferable old fart?  If it’s so easy, why don’t you do it?

What do you know about the cost of a bolt on a B-1?  Why did you use that analogy?  As for this gun, it’s a nine pound piece of steel.  Steel?  Is that what it is, Scales?  Steel?  None of it is polymer or aluminum?  And it’s nine pounds?  Nine pounds?  I own a 6.09 pound AR, and you’re going to put a 9 pound gun in a woman’s hands to carry?

Hey, speaking of that, how much of this has to do with trying to reduce weight for women in combat?  Or are you trying to reduce weight?  Nine pounds isn’t a weight reduction.

How much has changed since you saw the gun in action in Vietnam, Scales?  Is it the same gun, or not?  Have you shot one lately?  Field stripped it and cleaned it?  Are BCGs even made of the same material these days, Scales?

You moron.  The fact that Mattis put you in charge of this effort makes me laugh and sad at the same time.  This is a living example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.   Without metacognition, low-ability people cannot objectively evaluate their actual competence or incompetence.

You’re an incompetent dumbass.

Prior:

USMC M38 DMR Not Ready For Battle

Scales Traffics In Half Century Old Rhetoric On Stoner Design

Problems And Solutions In Rifle Caliber And Training

Blaming The Gun For The Battle Losses

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.

Abigail Hauslohner at The Washington Post:

Fabian Rodriguez was cradling his new rifle when he stopped at one of the gun-show booths to purchase a $5 chicken fajita MRE.

The “Meal Ready to Eat” is a mainstay for troops on combat missions. But Rodriguez, a 28-year-old San Antonio native who sells auto paint for a living, wasn’t going anywhere that would require one.

Fabian Rodriguez, 28, tries out his new AR-15 rifle at a shooting range in San Antonio.

“I like them,” he said. “Well, I like watching reviews of them. That’s something people do online, like, open them up and do taste tests.”

Rodriguez, who wears his handlebar mustache slicked into points and never leaves home without his cowboy boots, had come to the gun show to buy his first AR-15, a variant model of the M-16 and M-4 assault rifles that are used by the military, and currently the most popular rifle on the market.

[ … ]

The expanse of tables before him display AR-15s, AK-47s and every other sort of assault-style rifle; hefty shotguns and sleek, modern hunting rifles; handguns that range from high caliber Smith & Wessons to tiny Derringer guns that fit in the palm of your hand.

He makes his way past boxes of ammunition, T-shirts that say things like “CNN IS FAKE NEWS,” and a $1,900 Magnum Desert Eagle that he immediately recognizes as the gun Angelina Jolie carried in the movie “Tomb Raider.” “That specific one she used in the movie was 50-caliber, which is humongous,” he says.

He finds a strap for his AR, and a quick-disconnect for the strap. He inquires about left-handed adjustments and revisits the table where yesterday he purchased an AR-15 magazine engraved with the “Don’t tread on me” snake logo, just like the one pictured on the worn leather wallet that he is now again removing from his pocket.

“Can I still get that discount if I bought one yesterday?” he asks the vendor.

“Yeah, the two for $35?”

Rodriguez nods.

“I remember you,” the vendor adds, as Rodriguez hands him the cash for another magazine, this one engraved with the words, “You can’t protect the First without the Second.

[ … ]

The NSSF, an association of gun manufacturers and sellers — which several years ago started calling ARs “modern sporting rifles” — likes to hype the idea of the AR’s versatility as the key to its appeal: a gun for hunting, home security and whatever else you might need.

David Chipman, who used to carry an AR-15 for his job as a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, thinks there’s more to it.

“I would compare it to the same reason Americans might want a muscle car or enjoy a muscle car: It’s American-made, it has outsized power,” said Chipman, who left ATF after a 25-year career and now serves as a senior policy adviser to the gun-control advocacy group Giffords.

There’s a sort of “X-Game-type sensibility” to it, he said, a fixture of “American culture that I see most often with men.”

Rodriguez encounters plenty of skeptics in addition to his mother who ask him why anyone would need so many guns, particularly a semiautomatic rifle like an AR-15 — a gun that can fire 45 high-velocity rounds per minute, bullets that travel so fast that their shock waves mimic an explosion as they enter a body.

His honest answer: He doesn’t need them.

He wants them because he enjoys them, and the Constitution gives him the right to have them.

“I know I don’t need it,” he says of the AR-15. “The revolver, statistically speaking, is more than enough to defend myself.”

But it’s frustrating when people ask him this, because that’s not the point.

The point is that the Second Amendment protects his right to bear arms, whatever and however many he wants, as a guard against tyranny.

Hmm … there’s nothing comparable to getting an “authority” like a former ATF agent to say that there’s some mystique about the gun, alluring, tempting, tantalizing, beckoning people who otherwise wouldn’t want them to come, come, come to me, dear soul, and shoot me.  I can make your life complete.

Good God, what claptrap.  It’s as if Abigail has gone on a quest to hunt the snark, to find the great unwashed dirt people who eat beef, wear cowboy boots and hats, work an hourly job, get their hands dirty, run tooling equipment, run horses and cattle, drive trucks, and so on the list could go.  She’s heard that such people exist, but never actually met one inside the beltway.

Ooo … an expanse of tables with guns and ammo, tee shirts, and stupid bumper stickers.  And the allure and beckon of guns and money exchanging hands.  It’s as if there is actually private enterprise going on in America.

Give me a call, honey.  I can take you up to where they make corn liquor and don’t take kindly to FedGov sticking their nose around.  And you can shoot an AR-15 too.  Wouldn’t you enjoy that?  It’s the next logical step for you.

Seriously, gun owners know the first rule of gun club, which is that you don’t talk about gun club to the MSM.  That’s why gun data on ownership is so crappy.  Most gun owners aren’t going to talk, or if they do, they aren’t going to tell the truth.  Every now and then a MSM writer finds a gullible dunce like this to follow around.

Remember folks, the first rule of gun club is that you don’t talk about gun club to the MSM.  You only talk about gun club to make other gun owners among the potential recruits.

From Mack and other readers, this.

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit on Friday challenging Massachusetts’s ban on assault weapons.

U.S. District Judge William Young said in his ruling that the firearms and large magazines banned by the state in 1998 are “not within the scope of the personal right to ‘bear Arms’ under the Second Amendment.”

The features of a military-style rifle are “designed and intended to be particularly suitable for combat rather than sporting applications,” Young wrote.

Massachusetts was within its rights since the ban passed directly through elected representatives, Young decided.

“Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens,” Young wrote. “These policy matters are simply not of constitutional moment. Americans are not afraid of bumptious, raucous, and robust debate about these matters. We call it democracy.”

Well, I have a friend who hunts hogs in Georgia with a 6.5 Creedmoor AR-10, and the only reason I don’t hunt hogs in Georgia with an AR is because I haven’t been invited to go.  Hogs, he tells me, are tough critters and aren’t persuaded with single shots.  They often have to be shot multiple times.

But of course, that’s not the point, is it?  The point is that the second amendment is there for the amelioration of tyranny.  Because the politicians in Massachusetts are tyrants, they don’t want their subjects to have proper means of combat.  The judge is a tyrant too.  He told us so in his ruling.

Our stolid friend James Fallows at The Atlantic has yet another dense post up mainly consisting of letters to him and a few lines in reply.  There’s not much to see, except that he does make an admission that brings a much-needed breath of fresh air.

I understand that the AR-15 is not functionally unique. Thus anyone who argues that the AR-15 should not be in civilian hands should be willing to extend the argument to similar weapons. That’s what I think about the AR-15, and and I say the same thing about functionally similar weapons.

Good.  It’s a healthy and helpful thing to speak honestly about such matters.  This whole thing began some years ago with arguments over select-fire and the definition of assault rifle, the smaller caliber cartridge and whether it is any good for deer hunting, the value of a pistol grip, the “scary looking” features of the AR-15, the standard capacity magazine, its semi-automatic design, and on and on it went.

These were merely the first steps in the dance.  We’re way past that now.  Honesty has demanded that the progressives admit their demands, and honesty has demanded that we reply.  The definition of “military” is nonsensical anyway, and we all know it.

There was an article recently about Glock making their “military-grade” pistol available to civilians.  This means that it’s a Glock with a flat dark earth finish and pretentions of being modular.  Nothing more.  And truthfully, all weapons are “military grade.”

Let’s talk 30-06 bolt action deer rifles.  Yep.  Ask those whom Carlos Hathcock killed in Vietnam to speak from the grave and tell you all about that 30-06 round that hit them from a Winchester bolt action gun.  Marines were still using Winchester bolt action rifles for DM guns at the beginning of OIF, and most sniper rifles in military use today are bolt action.  How about 30-06 semi-automatic?  Yep.  The M1 Garand.  WWII.  And how about semi-automatic or automatic carbine?  Yep.  The M1 Carbine.  WWII.

How about shotguns?  Yep.  The Marine Corps was using Benelli M4s for room clearing in Now Zad, Afghanistan, during OEF.  How about revolvers?  Yep.  They were the sidearm for many years, and today .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum wheel guns are still in use defending homes and against big predators in America.

No one who knows anything should have to ask about Browning’s best design of his life, the 1911, which is still the most expensive handgun that can be purchased.  The point is that there is no such thing as a weapon that hasn’t been used on the field of battle between countries or various actors, and it makes no sense to argue over whether something is called “military grade.”  We’ve got virtually everything the military has ever had, and vice versa (except that the professional precision rifle shooters probably have better guns than the military).

The freshness about what Fallows said is that he admits that there is no stopping point, and that’s good, because logically he’s right.  And the freshness for us is actually not all that fresh, I just don’t think Fallows is hearing it, or perhaps he’s hearing it, but he just doesn’t believe it.

No.  We won’t give them up.  Period.  Your move.

Via Codrea, this from Daily Signal.

1. Harris County, Texas (2013)

A 15-year-old boy saved both his life and the life of his 12-year-old sister by fending off a pair of home invaders with his father’s AR-15.

2. Rochester, New York (2013)

Two armed burglars retreated from a college student’s apartment after coming face-to-face with an unloaded AR-15. The rifle itself instilled enough fear to cause them to flee.

3. Ferguson, Missouri (2014)

During the Ferguson, Missouri, riots, nearly all businesses within a particular 2-square-mile area of the city were looted or destroyed—except for one. African-American men guarded the gas station and convenience store of a white friend from looters and rioters. They did so armed with an AR-15, a MAC-10 “machine pistol,” and a variety of handguns.

4. Houston, Texas (2017)

A target of a drive-by shooting successfully fended off the attack by using his legally owned AR-15 against his three armed attackers. He was able to hit all three men in the moving vehicle.

5. Broken Arrow, Oklahoma (2017)

A homeowner’s 19-year-old son used an AR-15 to defend himself against three would-be burglars who broke into the home in broad daylight. The 19-year-old was later determined to have acted in justifiable self-defense.

6. Sutherland Springs, Texas (2017)

After a gunman opened fire on congregants inside First Baptist Church, a man living near the place of worship grabbed his AR-15 and engaged the shooter. The shooter subsequently dropped his own firearm and fled the scene as the courageous neighbor pursued him.

7. Oswego, Illinois (2018)

A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack on a pregnant woman. The rifle’s “intimidation factor” was credited as a reason why the attacker dropped his knife.

8. Catawba County, Illinois (2018)

After his 17-year-old relative successfully used his own firearm to fend off three would-be robbers who attacked him in the driveway of his home, a man used his AR-15 to stop a threat from one of the would-be robber’s upset family members.

Nice list, and thanks to author Amy Swearer for compiling it (most of which I’ve covered, just not compiled).  However, she missed the case of Mr. Stephen Bayezes who defended himself and his wife from home invaders.  There is also the case of Patrick Hale who apprehended two criminals who might have taken life again.

WGNTV:

OSWEGO, Ill. — A man armed with an AR-15 rifle helped stop a knife attack during an argument in Oswego.

It happened on Monday at an apartment building on Harbor Drive.

Police say it all began when someone with a knife attacked another person during an argument.

Neighbor Dave Thomas, who witnessed the attack, went into his home, got his rifle and ordered the suspect to stop.

“I ran back into the home, into my house and grabbed my AR-15. Grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun. It’s just a bigger gun. I think a little bit more than an intimidation factor definitely played a part in him actually stopping.”

No shots were fired.

The suspect was able to get away briefly, before police captured him.

The stabbing victim was taken to a hospital, and is expected to recover.

Wait!  I thought AR-15s were evil and only did bad things of their own volition, or turned good guys into bad guys who perpetrate mass shootings by their bad vibes and mind-control?

Guess this story breaks that narrative (as if it hasn’t been broken a thousand times before), sort of like the one about Stephen Bayazes.

This video is interesting given my almost obsessive interest in ballistics.

In it he analyzes the performance of the bonded soft point in ballistics gelatin, and his claim for superiority of this round is that it expands (like a soft point does) but it is more “barrier blind” than other rounds that are not bonded soft point.  It stays together and intact through barriers.

But take a look at the wound track in the gelatin.  It’s pretty straight and doesn’t fragment, and one of the things we know about the 5.56mm round is that it yaws upon tissue entry and fragments.  This is one of the aspects that gives it its lethality in spite of the small bore.

Compare that now with what you see in this ballistics test using M193 (there are a thousand like it, and also of the M855).  Compare and contrast the wound channel and fragmentation.  Which ammunition would you prefer for personal defense in close quarters battle?

Over the past couple of years I’ve seen a proliferation of online debates over the issue of KeyMod versus M-LOK.  One side declares the other incompetent and an abomination, the other side declares the opposite site dead and good riddance.

Just for the record, I think that each has its advantages and accomplishes what it sets out to accomplish, which in the end is weight reduction.  Use what you like, and don’t buy a gun because it has one rail or barrel shroud versus another.

I think the whole debate is stupid.