Archive for the 'Firearms' Category

Popular Mechanics:

On the heels of the Marine Corps’ desire for a new rifle for its infantrymen, the U.S. Army now says it is contemplating a dramatic switch in rifles. The service is considering going back to battle rifles—heavier rifles that can hit targets at longer ranges. The last time the Army fielded such a rifle was in the 1960s.

The story, broke by Soldier Systems Daily, says that U.S. Army troops feel they’re “in a street fight with a guy with longer arms.” That longer arm is the 7.62x54R cartridge, the cartridge used by the PK machine gun and Dragunov SVD sniper rifle. The PK squad machine gun is extremely common; it’s in use by the Taliban, the Islamic State, and most insurgent and terrorist groups worldwide. Longer and heavier than the 7.62×39-millimeter round used in the AK series of assault rifles, a PK with the 7.62x54R round has an effective range of 800 to 1,000 yards, versus only about 350 yards for an AK-47.

On the Army side, the maximum effective range of an M4 carbine against man-sized targets is about 500 yards, depending on the skill of the rifleman, and 700 yards for the M249 squad automatic weapon. Both fire the same cartridge. That leaves a dead zone of roughly 500 to 1,000 yards where the bulk of a nine person infantry squad can’t engage individual enemies. In a platoon of 40 soldiers, on average only about six soldiers armed with M249s, marksman rifles, and M240 machine guns have the range to engage an enemy in the dead zone.

U.S. Army troops may have an edge on paper, but guerrilla groups don’t adhere to a bureaucratic equipment roster that says each unit can have a certain number of weapons. Taliban and IS groups routinely have a large number of heavier machine guns, and what they lack in skill they often try to make up in firepower.

While there are a number of readers who would applaud this move in favor of a 30-06 (the old Garand) or .308 (7.62mm), a “real battle rifle,” I think it will go nowhere and lacks traction.  It certainly lack traction with me for reasons I’ll explain.

The excuse that the Taliban shoot machine guns and longer range weapons is disingenuous.  As I documented in my coverage of the battle of Wanat, the issue with fighting the Taliban had nothing to do with the M4, and everything to do with deployment of Soldiers in bad locations, slowly enough that the Taliban had time to mass troops on a roughly ten to one ratio.  They had a near Battalion size group fighting a platoon size group of Soldiers on low terrain.

There were other problems with Soldiers in the Hindu Kush such as the lack of training in shooting uphill (as well as not owning the high ground).  One problem that could be corrected is that the M4s the Army fields have been shot so many times and the parts so worn that they malfunction easily.  Many Soldiers don’t know enough to modify their own weapons, wouldn’t be allowed to if they could, and lack the funds to do it.  But there are ways to assist your rifle in its accuracy, reliability and longevity.

But take a closer look at what they’re asking for.  They want to field the 7.62mm, with its weight additional weight and the weight of the ammunition, and they expect their men (and women, unfortunately) to be able to shoot accurately beyond 500 yards and up to 1000 yards.  This will require the use of good optics, not an ACOG or the Army equivalent, but scoped shooting.

Consider The Firearm Blog and one writer’s position that the Marine Corp Scout Sniper training is the best combined precision and marksmanship observation packages in the United States.  It has a high failure rate, and takes months to complete.  No unit can go without Marines for long enough to send hundreds or thousands of Marines to this training.  And there aren’t enough classes or instructors to go around even if they could.

My son, Daniel, has been through all of the shooting instruction in these classes, albeit not the observation and tracking.  It does indeed take months of training to understand and use high power scopes for precision shooting.  For the Army to pretend that they’re are going to send thousands of brand new Soldiers at Fort Jackson into classes to learn parallax, windage adjustments, elevation and humidity effects on shooting, and so on, is a pipe dream.

I’m not suggesting, by the way, that you or your family not have your own higher caliber and bolt action precision chassis weapons as well as your CQB and shorter range weapons, or that you forego the time and accoutrements to use them properly.  Every gun has its purpose, and you need all the right tools for the job ahead.  I’m suggesting that America isn’t going to make snipers out of their Soldiers by switching from 5.56mm to 7.62mm.

The State:

Impassioned pleas by legislators from both sides of the aisle failed to stop a majority of House members Wednesday from advancing a bill that allows for the carrying of firearms without a permit.

On a 64-46 vote, the S.C. House of Representatives passed the bill, which had been clouded in controversy over how it progressed through committee and allegations that Republicans stymied debate. It’ll head for the Senate after a perfunctory vote on Thursday.

“The legislative history of this bill is an embarrassment,” said Rep. James Smith, D-Richland, who repeatedly attempted to thwart a vote on the bill after Republicans invoked a procedural move that limited debate.

The bill calls for what proponents refer to as “constitutional carry,” or allowing those who can legally buy a firearm to carry a concealed weapon without having to obtain a permit.

It also allows for open carry, which grants weapons holders the ability to carry their firearms on their person for everyone to see. The law still would bar carrying a firearm while committing a crime.

Smith was not alone in trying to delay a vote. Several Republicans joined in, because they were against how the bill was advanced or didn’t like parts of the proposed law.

Rep. Gary Clary, R-Pickens, said he was against the bill because during his time as a judge and as a legislator, he has advocated for allowing all sides to have their say. Invoking a procedural vote to limit debate prevented that. He also said he just thinks “it’s a bad bill.”

[ … ]

Like Clary, Rep. Bill Crosby, R-Charleston, called the proposal a “bad bill.” He was against the portion that allows for open carry.

While dangling his concealed-weapons permit from his wallet, Crosby stressed he is “for guns” and the Second Amendment. He said he just didn’t think this change is needed.

“This bill doesn’t help the Second Amendment,” Crosby said. “All it does is it makes these good ol’ boys who like to have guns strapped to their hips not conceal them.”

Crosby said he is thankful for the Senate, which will probably kill the bill by having it languish in committee. Previous permit-less carry bills have suffered that fate in past years.

First of all, invoking a procedural stipulation that limits debate is a tried and true, well recognized procedure allowed by parliamentary rules.  Anyone who has worked under “Robert’s Rules of Order” knows that, and those complaining about closing debate also know that.  They’re making up their objection to closing debate.  It’s just a red herring.  Debate has to be closed at some point, and they just did it sooner rather than later.  It’s entirely possible under parliamentary procedure to have absolutely no debate at all.  The vote is what matters.

As for Crosby’s complaint that “All it does is it makes these good ol’ boys who like to have guns strapped to their hips not conceal them,” we may reply that all the current law does is make those boys have to conceal the guns they have on their hips for no good reason at all except that you want them to.  You like to conceal, others may not.  And your way doesn’t do anything at all for the second amendment.  Your way forces a rule on people who neither want it nor need it.  Our way undoes an unnecessary rule.  You’re the bad guy here, not us.  See how that works, Crosby?

If this does indeed die in the Senate like so many times in the past, then we’ll know who to go after for the next primary and election cycle.  You guys aren’t going to get away with the things you once did.  We’re watching very closely.  Ask former state senator Larry Martin if you don’t believe me.  Go ahead.  Ignore gun owners one more time.  Let’s make sure your name is written down in the memory of patriots everywhere across South Carolina.  We don’t forget.

As for the “journalist” who wrote all of this, Cynthia Roldán, take note that the only ones around her who can make “impassioned pleas” are those who oppose constitutional carry.  It’s as if there is weeping in the halls of power in Columbia over the awful things taking place, not just among Democrats, mind you, but from “both sides of the isle,” with the emotionless gun advocates impervious to the weeping.  And she managed to locate those Republicans who voted against this bill and turn it into quite a dramatic presentation, yes?

Actually, she did us a service.  Otherwise, how would you have know what a putz Crosby was?

Great Falls Tribune:

The House of Representatives gave preliminary approval Tuesday to a bill meant to preserve Montanans’ right to bear arms by prohibiting the enforcement of any federal ban on firearms.

Senate Bill 99 would establish the “Montana Federal Firearm, Magazine, and Ammunition Ban Enforcement Prohibition Act.” The bill passed out of the Senate in February on a 30-20 vote.

Republican Rep. Seth Berglee is carrying the bill in the House for Republican Sen. Cary Smith.

“We did add a couple of amendments to it to allow for federal assistance, as long as it is not for the primary purpose of prohibiting, restricting or requiring any of the federal bans,” Berglee said.

At the bill’s first hearing in the House, lobbyist for School Administrators of Montana Patrick Audet opposed the bill. He says the bill would allow firearms on school campuses.

“If an officer couldn’t enforce that law, that would be a problem. We would be opposed to that,” Audet said.

Kansas had a similar law called the Second Amendment Protection Act.  Two gentlemen then got caught up in the web of cowardice when one of them fabricated and sold a suppressor, and the other one bought it.  Both men were found guilty of violation of the NFA.  And what did the brave patriots in Kansas do about it?  They did nothing.

I warned future “patriots” about this sort of thing.

I’ve said before, don’t even consider something like nullification unless you’re willing to go the mattresses for your people.  The lawmakers could have handed the governor the tools to deal with the federal intrusion, and the governor could have had the balls to do it.

But none of this obtained, and the citizens suffered as a result.  Unless you’re willing to arrest federal agents who attempt to enforce these laws and throw them in the state penitentiary with the other prisoners, don’t even consider nullification.

Nullification laws made for show are immoral.  Nullification laws made for real are admirable, but states have to be willing to back it all up with force.

I see no difference between suppressors and any other kind of firearm or associated equipment.  If Montana actually intends to enforce this law against federal agents who attempt to arrest people when they run afoul of federal laws, current or future, then I applaud this law.

On the other hand, if it’s another gimmick for votes or show-law for the purpose of making a statement, or in other words, if this law will have no teeth because Montana has the same kind of cowards in government and law enforcement as Kansas, then stop right here.

Don’t do it.  It’s time for a gut check for Montanans.  What will it be?

Lucky Gunner recently had a great article on Revolver Velocity Versus Barrel Length that I missed, and I recommend that you spend a couple of minutes studying their results.

Their results might surprise you.  First of all, barrel length doesn’t matter as much as you might have thought, perhaps as much as 100 FPS for barrel lengths in the range we normally carry or shoot.  You have to get really long barrels (such as for hunting) for the length to make any substantial difference.

Second, the +P loads do actually give you noticeably better performance (as much as 100 FPS or more) compared to the regular loads.

Third, as good as the +P loads do compared to .39 Special, they don’t compare to the difference you get with the .357 Magnum, which is as much as several hundred FPS depending upon bullet weight.

Lucky Gunner recommend that you test your own loads, guns and bullet weights if you want an accurate assessment.  They also link this article where a table is included that has good data for your consideration.

Bad day for the home invader.  Good day for liberty.

David Codrea:

“They were tortured with a blow torch and knives,” a chilling Middleburg Observer report about a South African farm attack relates. “A plastic bag was stuffed down Sue’s throat and they attempted to strangle Robert with a black bag around his neck … “In any other country, such a crime would be almost unthinkable. But in South Africa, these kinds of farm attacks are happening nearly every day.”

I’ve told you guys before (see comments) and if you ever had an predilections towards trying to find common ground with the abusers and controllers, you’d better listen to me again.

Mankind is evil.  It’s called federal headship, and it happened in the garden with Adam as the father of all mankind.  God’s saving grace can redeem individual men, and it can change a society by “common grace.”  It has before in America under far different circumstances.  But with the anemia of the church and so-called Christians who have abdicated all responsibility for their culture, there are consequences and they aren’t good.  There is an ebb and flow to this sort of thing until we learn that lesson again … and again … and again.

When I initially read this it reminded me of the atrocities perpetrated by AQ in Iraq when I covered the war there.  They would take drills and drill into the heads of live humans.  Don’t think it can’t happen in South Africa, and don’t think it can’t happen here, and happen to you or your family if you don’t gun up.

Prepare to defend yourself.  A lack of will is even worse than having no weapons, because you may be able to find the weapons if it’s not too late.  But don’t count on it.

Via Instapundit, this report comes to us about defensive use of an AR-15.

BROKEN ARROW, Okla. (KTUL) — One person is in custody after three suspects in a Wagoner County home invasion were shot to death Monday afternoon by one of the residents.

According to the Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office, the suspects’ getaway driver has been arrested. The 21-year-old woman turned herself in at the Broken Arrow Police Department hours after the shooting, saying she had information.

Investigators haven’t released the names of anyone involved but say the deceased suspects are between 16 and 18 years old. Two of the suspects were armed, according to investigators. One with a knife and the other with brass knuckles.

[ … ]

Mahoney says the suspects broke in through a glass door in the back of the house. After entering the residence, the suspects encountered the homeowner’s 23-year-old son who also lives there.

“There was a short exchange of words and then gunfire happened,” he said.

Two suspects died in the kitchen and a third ran from the home but collapsed and died in the driveway.

Both residents are cooperating with investigators. The homeowner’s son volunteered to go to the sheriff’s office to give a statement.

“Preliminary investigation, it looks like it was self-defense,” said Mahoney.

This is impossible.  We all know that no one needs that awful high capacity magazine, and no one needs an AR-15 for self defense, even against multiple intruders.  And we all know that it’s more dangerous for the homeowner to have a gun than it is for the assailants.  Guns take on a life of their own and turn and shoot the innocent like they have an evil brain.  The report must be mistaken.

No, I’m pretty sure it says what it says, and he is alive and well, and the assailants are not.  He did one thing right, and one thing very wrong.

First, what he did right.  He assumed that if he had not used his weapon, the assailants would have harmed him.  If an intruder is in your home, you must assume they are armed, and armed with more than you can see in the instant you are making your decisions of life and death.  And you must also assume that they are capable of using their hands to kill you.  Finally, you must assume that if they are in your home, they intend you harm.  It may not be correct at the time, but you simply don’t know that and cannot discern their intentions with certainty.

Now to what he did wrong.  He talked to the police.  Boys and girls, don’t ever talk to the police.  Not even if you shot in self defense, not even if you have nothing to hide, and not even if you’re an honest and decent human.  Don’t talk to the police.

Ever.

Shooting Illustrated:

A miniature 9 mm also offers you the advantages of the same manual of arms your larger gun. If you’re used to a striker-fired gun, the operation of the Ruger LC9s or Glock G43 will seem like second nature to you, just like the operation of snub-nosed revolvers mimic the operation of their larger cousins. My fingers goes naturally to the magazine release on my 9 mm Smith & Wesson Shield because that’s where it is on the large semi-automatic pistols that I occasionally carry, and the methods I use to clear malfunctions are pretty much the same between those guns as well.

The reasons to carry a subcompact, single-stack 9 mm over a larger pistol are also essentially the same as reasons to carry a small revolver instead of full-sized gun. With the right holster and appropriate cover garment, it’s fairly easy to discretely carry a full-size 9 mm on a daily basis and without tipping people off that you’re carrying a pistol with you. However, it’s even easier to conceal a smaller gun, and a smaller gun also opens other options like pocket carry that are even more discreet.

When it comes to defensive applications, the subcompact single stack 9 mm has several advantages over snub-nosed revolvers. The thinner, slimmer design of the semi-automatic means it can slide into locations for concealed carry that aren’t available to thicker, bulkier revolvers, although, counter-intuitively, I’ve found that unless you pay attention to holster choice, a small .38 Spl. revolver forms an indistinct lump in a front pocket that’s easily mistaken for a wallet and keys, while the flatter, more angular form of a mini 9 mm sticks out and says “gun” more readily.

Another advantage of a mini 9 mm over small revolver is ammunition capacity. Subcompact single stacks typically have at least six rounds of ammunition in the magazine and one more in the chamber, and extended magazine that pack in eight rounds or more are not uncommon, By comparison, six rounds is maximum amount of ammo in most pocket revolvers, with five rounds being the most-common option available.

I’ll grant the point about capacity, as well as the ability quickly to reload.  But for those of us whose hands don’t readily shoot the small subcompact with accuracy, and who simply do not run the gun well, it makes no difference.  Sometimes these arguments are semantic and pale in comparison to whether you can operate the system and hit what you’re aiming at.  As to whether I can conceal a smallish .38 Special revolver, I have no problem at all keeping my air weight S&W wheel gun on my ankle or anywhere else.

And I never worry about whether a round is chambered, or whether it will work when it’s supposed to.  A round is ready, and it will work.  I know that without a doubt.  The wheel gun will never go out of style.  It may be that I carry it as a backup gun to a 1911 on my hip, or sometimes I have to carry only it depending upon circumstances.  But I will always carry a wheel gun, regardless of what LEOs choose to do.

WSPA.com:

GREENVILLE, N.C. (WNCT) – A woman is expected to recover after an early Saturday morning shooting, according to Greenville Police.

The shooting happened in a moving vehicle around 3 a.m. Saturday near Ridge Place.

All four occupants of the car reported they were traveling on Hooker Road toward Ridge Place.  As the driver made a right turn onto Ridge Place, a handgun belonging to the back left passenger fell to the floor.

In an attempt to catch the gun, the back left passenger accidentally pressed the trigger and the gun discharged, striking the driver in the back.

The driver of the car was transported to Vidant Medical Center for treatment and is expected to recover.

The rear left passenger, Joshua Strong, was cited for discharging a firearm within city limits.

The Police are annoying.  But even though they determined there was no foul play involved, and they did, they must have had to cite the accidental shooter with some code violation in order to have a police report for the hospital visit.  Or so I’m assuming.

Folks, it’s been said a thousand times.  For modern firearms, there is absolutely no reason to try to catch the gun if it’s falling, it is drop-safe.  Trying to catch it may very well end up shooting somebody because not only might you catch the gun with the trigger, the natural tendency when anything is falling, including yourself, is to grip tightly.

This is a sympathetic muscle reflex, and as I’ve discussed before, it’s possible with many thousands of hours of training to overcome this and train this out of you.  But you don’t have all of that training, and you likely don’t have the time for it.  Neither do I.

Let falling guns fall.  Take it to a gunsmith to repair the ding or scratch.  It’s be a chance to get that brand new Cerakote finish you always wanted for that gun.

NY Daily News:

North Dakotans will no longer need a permit to carry a concealed weapon after Republican Governor Doug Burgum signed legislation lifting restrictions, a victory for gun rights advocates that came a week after South Dakota’s governor vetoed a similar bill.

The law, which takes effect on Aug. 1, mandates that gun owners only need a North Dakota driver’s license or state identification card for at least a year before they can carry a concealed firearm in public.

Under current regulations, applicants must take a test to obtain a permit which entails fees of more than $100.

The measure, signed late on Thursday, was approved by the Republican-controlled legislature despite concerns over public safety if the state made it easier to carry hidden weapons. Advocates framed the issue in terms of the constitutional right to bear arms.

“North Dakota has a rich heritage of hunting and a culture of deep respect for firearm safety,” Burgum said. “As a hunter and gun owner myself, I strongly support gun rights for law-abiding citizens.”

The legislation makes North Dakota the 12th state to allow gun owners to carry their weapons without a concealed-carry permit, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which opposes the practice.

Good for North Dakotans.  Now, some enterprising reader could prepare an FOIA request (or perhaps it doesn’t even require that?) and research violence with guns in North Dakota over the next several months and years to see what happens.

Here’s a prediction.  Nothing.  Except a loss in revenue by CLEOs for their new Dodge Chargers, rifles, fancy comms gear and SWAT training.

So what’s the holdup in South Carolina?  Why are we having to wait for this?  Are you guys in South Carolina going to prove yourselves to be communists by letting constitutional carry die in the House or Senate?  And what about North Carolina?  We have a constitutional carry bill too.

See, it’s possible to be lovers of liberty.  You just have to have courage and principles.