Archive for the 'Firearms' Category

News from Connecticut.

Stag Arms, a New Britain manufacturer of automatic and semiautomatic AR-15 rifles, announced Friday it’s leaving the city for a yet-to-be-determined site that offers “significant support for the firearms industry.”

Good.  It couldn’t happen to a better state – or worse state – or whatever.  I hate that it took this long.  I hope Connecticut suffers financially from this at least a little bit.

News from Colorado.

About half of the state’s county sheriffs this week joined the battle against Colorado’s ban on gun magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, arguing that the law hinders peoples’ ability to defend themselves.

Although law enforcement are exempt from the ban, the sheriffs argued in their brief to the Colorado Supreme Court that civilians should have the same access to magazines as typical officers and deputies. If law enforcement agencies believe a magazine that holds 20 or 30 rounds is best for defense, then those magazines are the best option for regular people who want to defend themselves, the sheriffs argued.

“Citizens do and should copy sheriffs’ firearm and magazine selections so they will have reliable, sturdy arms for defense of self and others,” the brief stated. “These arms will be powerful enough for defense against violent criminals, and these arms will be appropriate for use in civil society, because sheriffs’ arms are not mass-killing military arms. Instead, sheriffs’ arms are best for defense of self and others, including against multiple attackers.”

Thirty county sheriffs, the Colorado Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association and the Independence Institute filed the brief on Monday in support of a group of gun rights advocates challenging the law’s constitutionality.

[ … ]

Sheriffs from three Denver-area counties — Denver, Boulder and Arapahoe — were absent from the list.

The sheriffs and others in the brief argued that magazines that hold 20 or 30 rounds should be categorized as standard magazines because they are commonly included in the sale of firearms by default. Sheriff’s deputies often carry magazines of those sizes with them on patrol.

The brief offered an alternative to the ban. The state could instead require that a person have a state concealed handgun permit in order to own a magazine that holds more than 15 rounds, the sheriffs argued.

Okay, I see how this works.  An outright ban is unconstitutional, but seeking approval for the object from the controllers isn’t because we say so.  The brief looked good up until that point.

Actually, I have one other nit.  I would argue that rather than “citizens copy[ing] Sheriffs’ firearm and magazine selections,” Sheriffs and the military alike copy our firearm selections.  The best, most difficult, most grueling test for any firearm is on the open market among the working man.

The military buys from the low bidder.  The working man tells others about what doesn’t work and that becomes common knowledge.

I lied.  I have one other nit.  I would argue that Sheriffs are citizens too.

You might be interested in this.

Via Uncle, this report.

Uncle asks, “Does he also drive a model T?”

Just one bit of correction.  The words “Model T” should be replaced with “muscle car.”

Prince Law:

Today, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a 53 page majority opinion, a 2 page concurring decision by Justice Baer and a 16 page concurring opinion by Justice Dougherty which Justice Mundy joined, in the case of Commonwealth v. Hicks, which addressed whether the mere open or concealed carrying of a firearm constitutes reasonable suspicion of a crime.

[ … ]

“Before this Court, the Commonwealth again advanced its “radical position,” Hawkins, 692 A.2d at 1071, in the present iteration contending that police officers are not only entitled, but “duty bound” to seize and investigate the licensing status of every individual who carries a concealed firearm in Pennsylvania. Brief for Commonwealth at 11. We have little difficulty in again rejecting this proposition, because we conclude that the Robinson rule contravenes the Terry doctrine and, indeed, the fundamental guarantees of the Fourth Amendment.

Although the carrying of a concealed firearm is unlawful for a person statutorily prohibited from firearm ownership or for a person not licensed to do so, see 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 6105-06, there is no way to ascertain an individual’s licensing status, or status as a prohibited person, merely by his outward appearance. As a matter of law and common sense, a police officer observing an unknown individual can no more identify whether that individual has a license in his wallet than discern whether he is a criminal. Unless a police officer has prior knowledge that a specific individual is not permitted to carry a concealed firearm, and absent articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion that a firearm is being used or intended to be used in a criminal manner, there simply is no justification for the conclusion that the mere possession of a firearm, where it lawfully may be carried, is alone suggestive of criminal activity.

If the consequence of our decision is that future courts afford meaningful Fourth Amendment protection to individuals engaged in other commonly licensed activities, that result is preferable to our allowance of governmental overreach that undermines the individual freedom that is essential to our way of life in this constitutional republic.

…

Crime and violence are ever-present threats in society, and it can be tempting to look to the government to provide protection from “dangerous” people with constant vigilance. However, the protections of the Fourth Amendment remain an essential bulwark against the overreaches and abuses of governmental authority over all individuals. Notwithstanding the dangers posed by the few, we must remain wary of the diminution of the core liberties that define our republic, even when the curtailment of individual liberty appears to serve an interest as paramount as public safety. “Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting).

Consistent with the General Assembly’s reservation of the exclusive prerogative to regulate firearms in this Commonwealth, codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 6120, the additional requirement that an individual possess a license in order to carry a firearm openly within the City of Philadelphia is prescribed by statute, not by municipal ordinance. See 18 Pa.C.S. § 6108; see generally Ortiz v. Commonwealth, 681 A.2d 152 (Pa. 1996).”

So the court did three things: [1] decreed that the mere carrying of a firearm in a concealed manner isn’t a reasonable suspicion of a crime (I would have to know the specifics of the case to be able to ascertain why this is important since if the firearm is concealed well, it wouldn’t be seen by anyone), [2] decreed that the mere carrying of a firearm openly isn’t a reasonable suspicion of a crime (apparently Pennsylvania has a permitted open carry system, and cops don’t have the right to stop someone who is openly carrying to ask about a permit), and [3] decreed that little tyrants in locales like cities or townships don’t have to right to upend this judgment.

Every once in a while someone gets it right.  I would think that after the decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals viz. The Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department, they would stop trying to argue that they have unlimited rights.

But also just as apparent is the fact that the police go from judge to judge, and court to court, until they find someone who agrees with them.

That’s the American way, yes?

Personal Defense Network:

Striker-fired semi-automatics were made popular in the 1980s by Glock. Although the company was not well received in the beginning, it has become one of the most popular defensive pistol brands in the world. The striker firing mechanism uses a spring-loaded firing pin that works more like the launcher in a pinball machine than that of a traditional pistol with a hammer. This spring-loaded pin is partially cocked by the movement of the slide. The trigger then cocks the pin the remainder of the way and releases it to strike the primer and ignite the cartridge. Why does this make a difference to the beginning defensive shooting student?

[ … ]

Why does this affect the decision between these two action types? The amount of force or weight of the trigger pull in many of these firearms is very similar, in about the six- to seven-pound range. But the duration or length of that weight is far greater on the double action only. Imagine you need to move an 80-pound bag of concrete from point A to point B. If point A is five feet away from point B, it is going to be much easier than if point A is 20 feet away. Similarly, completing a rudimentary test of a Ruger LC9 (double action only) to determine where the weight begins on the trigger, it took moving the trigger approximately ½ inch to activate the trigger. By comparison, an M&P 9 (striker-fired) took approximately 1/8 inch, after the weight began, to activate the trigger. You need to utilize more trigger control on the double action only, since the length of the trigger pull tends to amplify the deviation caused by lack of trigger control.

[ … ]

Here is a list of striker-fired pistols that you can consider as suitable options — but you should still dry fire the gun prior to purchasing to be sure it is right for you.

• Glock: All models are striker fire action. Find one that fits your hand comfortably and is in the caliber you want.

• Smith & Wesson M&P series: All semi-automatic models except Bodyguard. M&P Shield offers the striker-fire action in a very compact slim design. I suggest this if ease of concealment is an important consideration for you.

• Ruger: SR9 and SR9c.

• Springfield Armory: XD series.

Well … okay … whatever.  His comparison is only with double-action pistols.  Furthermore, I’m not convinced that if you’re well-rehearsed enough you can’t make that first shot as accurate as any other.  I’ve shot revolvers for a long time and I would entrust my life to them – in fact, I do under certain carry scenarios (smallish wheel gun on my ankle when the need arises for absolute concealment or in non-permissive carry situations).

But I still say, give me my 1911 any day, even with its additional weight.  With its reliability, its narrow frame (which fits my fingers knurled up from RA), and its ability to chamber a round and yet use a mechanical safety with a single sweep of the thumb as I obtain purchase on the gun, my option works for me, and is probably better.  Besides, I don’t like the feel of the springy, spongy, striker fired pistols.  If you don’t think a single stack design with its narrow frame is better for my hands, then go back in time, ask God to give you RA your entire life, knurl your knuckles up like mine (with ligaments turned into scar tissue from attacks from white blood cells), and then we’ll talk.  Until then, you’re not an expert on my situation in life.

I like the light touch of the trigger for a hammer-fired 1911, and I’m used to it.  I’m accurate with it, I’m consistent with it, it fits my hand, its safe, and I like the grip angle.  I don’t really care if it works for you.  It works for me.

I consider this to be of the same genre as debates over holsters (I’ve seen some hating on leather holsters lately).  For the most part I’m pretty unimpressed with folks asserting their bonafides and telling you what you should and shouldn’t do.  I rarely use leather, but when I do I’ve got a nice one with a retention strap.  I don’t like the feel of Kydex and I find it to run counter to concealability and unforgiving in terms freedom of movement and bending.  I prefer a Cordura holster with a retention strap for both IWB and OWB carry, and as readers know, I absolutely hate IWB carry.

I recommend that you shoot what you like, like what you shoot, and get good at whatever that is.  I recommend the same thing with holsters.  Wear what you like and whatever works for you and meets your needs.  I realize that it may run counter for a gun blog not to try to boss you around and bark orders out at people, but I respect my readers enough to believe that you’re capable of making your own educated choices.

If you don’t do anything else today, watch this video entirely.  It’s well worth your time. There is also information presented by Stoner that doesn’t fit the narrative, so it’s a good history lesson.

Do you think it would have been fun to have worked with him? I do.

Shooting Illustrated:

Plated
Reflective, plated finishes such as hard chrome, nickel and gold have been around longer than anyone presently reading this magazine. While no longer popular on long gun exteriors, surface treatments like chrome-plating work well on and in certain internal components. Most tactical-rifle shooters have experience with chrome-lined bores, which provide wear- and corrosion-resistance. We also find chrome in less-obvious places like piston-rod ends, the inside of an AR’s bolt carrier and in the open end of the carrier’s gas key. One complication to chrome-plating is that it adds to the dimensions of finished parts, so components must be undersize by whatever thickness the plating will add.

Attempts to chrome-line rifle bores date back to the first half of the 20th century. The process has long since become standard in military and police battle rifles and carbines around the world. Sources for true match-quality, chrome-lined barrels can be counted on one hand, with fingers left over. Most chromed bores are very durable, but they typically come up short in the accuracy department due to variations in thickness throughout the bore. Chrome-plated parts are slicker than bare steel, allowing for easier cleanup of pistons and bolt components. Unfortunately, the constant slamming of metal on metal can cause chrome to wear or flake off of hard-use parts like bolt-locking lugs, which can affect accuracy, reliability and even safety. Chrome plating seems to do its best work inside of components subjected to high friction—but not hard impacts—and when done well, is still a great solution to limit erosion and wear.

Nickel-Boron
Nickel-boron (NiB) is an “electroless” gun coating, instead applied chemically. That makes for extremely uniform surface coatings on parts with tight tolerances, like a trigger’s sear-engagement surfaces. NiB reduces friction and speeds the cooling of high-heat components due to the increased surface area created by the coating’s texture. Internal rifle components appear to be the best-suited for NiB, and in my experience, this gun coating is much more durable than traditional plated finishes on contact surfaces like bolt-locking lugs. NiB provides excellent corrosion resistance, but over time it will give way to the ravages of high heat and pressure on hard-use components. NiB-coated components are relatively easy to clean up but may become discolored when subjected to high heat.

Nitride
Names like Melonite, Ni-Corr, Black nitride or salt bath nitride are all variations of a surface treatment formally known as “Liquid Salt Bath Ferritic Nitrocarburizing Non-Cyanide Bath” (FNC) or simply nitriding. This process isn’t really a gun coating, since it doesn’t change a part’s finished dimensions, so it is well-suited for both precision internal components and bores. An added plus is, unlike chrome lining—which is mostly limited to chrome-moly steel blends—nitriding is optimal for stainless-steel bores, too. Its high resistance to wear and corrosion also make it useful as an external surface protectant. Nitrided surfaces are very hard and, since the FNC process transforms the surface rather than coating it, the metal itself must be removed to get through to unprotected steel below. I have been using nitrided barrels, bolts and trigger groups for years and have yet to wear one out. From a production standpoint, nitriding is inexpensive and so long as it is done correctly, the high temperatures that the process relies on for application will not harm steel rifle components.

Spray-on
Gun coatings such as Cerakote, DuraCoat and KG Gunkote are applied via compressed-air sprayers. They differ somewhat in composition and may be air- or heat-cured. Spray-on coatings are best-suited for rifle exteriors where the inevitable variations in thickness will not change tolerances nor impede function. They have a fair amount of wear resistance, but heavy use or careless handling can still cause them to wear through, scratch or chip off. When properly applied, spray-on gun coating provides good corrosion resistance and allow you to truly customize your rifle’s appearance due to endless color and pattern variations. Spray-ons have the added benefit of being equally well-suited for aluminum, polymer and wooden rifle components, too. These finishes are susceptible to harsh chemical strippers like acetone or ammonia-based solvents, so stick to safer cleaners like mineral spirits or conventional powder solvents when cleaning painted rifles.

I’ve always thought I needed to know a little more than I do about both the materials and the coatings for firearms.  Unfortunately, I only took one materials engineering course in school, and most of the time materials engineering is left to the folks who do it all the time.

But this article is a good start on coatings.  I welcome reader feedback if you find any other articles or papers on the subject, or just want to weigh in with your own expertise.

Forgotten Weapons covers a recent trip to Knight’s Armament.

They covered the Stoner 63 earlier, and he seems to verify what I’ve heard so many times – the controllability is exceptional.

I have always thought that the U.S. Military made a mistake in not buying into the full Stoner system of firearms.

Shooting Sports USA:

Custom barrel manufacturers like Obermeyer, Krieger, Lilja, Hart, Douglas, Schneider and other companies which go by the maker’s last name, are your best assurance of good quality. That’s not to say that other maker’s barrels―let’s call them “semi-custom”―don’t shoot as well, but it is to suggest a lower element of risk involved in your satisfaction. I think it’s wise to request a stainless steel barrel since they will, on average, shoot a little better for a little longer.

It would be nice if a materials engineer and/or a highly experienced gunsmith would weigh in on this, but that’s not my understanding.  My understanding (which might be flawed) is that a SS barrel will be more accurate out of the box, but that whereas another barrel might last for 25,000 rounds, a SS barrel will last for 15,000 rounds before needing to be replaced.  Again, if my understanding is wrong on this, it would be good to know it.

The chambering option that probably gets the most thought about and worry over is throating. Throating, let’s say here for simplicity, controls the distance of a bullet; bearing surface to the origin of the lands of the rifling. Almost always, a rifle shoots best when a bullet at least starts near the lands, if not on them. If the bullet has to travel through space before engaging the rifling, that’s called “jump,” and that’s an issue of concern. Since there is such a difference in comparing length of short range and long range bullets for this rifle, some compromise has to be met. Essentially, getting less jump for the shorter 68- to 77-grain bullets fired from magazine-length rounds means that the longer 80-grain bullets used at 600 yards will be seated more deeply into the case (which will reduce powder capacity). Short or long? Either, or anything in-between for that matter. It doesn’t really seem to matter. Why even talk about it? Why not? Everyone else does. What they’re not really talking about, though, is who’s shooting what scores with various ideologies. That’s because AR-15s shoot just as well at 200 and 300 yards with all the different “magazine” bullets, regardless of where those bullets are sitting with respect to distance from the lands. What matters to 600-yard performance is that the shooter knows how to experiment and adjust the amount of jump the 80-grain bullets have, and that discussion is for another article.

Someone care to elaborate what’s he’s talking about here?