Archive for the 'Guns' Category

Guns.com:

Over the last few years, I’ve seen a lot of ink spilled about the one—that is the ultimate, end of the world, SHTF, need no other, bug out bag firearm that will carry you and yours at the end of days.  These articles usually go into great detail as to the how’s, what’s, and why’s of the caliber, model, and make for that ideal, one and done gun but I’ve seen precious little written about one very important issue that could turn your uber-pistol into a good looking paperweight.  What if it breaks?

Recently I had one of my Smith & Wesson revolvers put completely out of action by the tiniest of parts, a hand torsion spring. This spring is what keeps the hand engaging the ratchet on the rear of the cylinder. This little two-dollar part shut the gun down completely and it was eye opening for me because, if the bombs start dropping, I know I would want to have that wheelgun with on my hip.

So, if you are into buying a gun for one of those dreaded “what if” occasions, how do you guard against mechanical failure when ordering a replacement part from Brownell’s or another part is no longer an option?

Author David LaPell does a good job of discussing the need for some rudimentary Gunsmith skills, having spare parts and the right tools, buying reliable guns, and the virtue of purchasing in two’s (although this is an interesting option and one that I have thought about, it could get much more expensive than the average person’s bank account can sustain).

The article is worth the read time.  I have a number of guns, all of them reliable personal defense weapons except one, and that one will never go anywhere with me except to the range as a range toy.

I realize that your so-called bug out provisions are weight-limited.  You cannot carry unlimited water, freeze dried food, water filter, first aid and medical supplies, tactical lights and batteries, cordage, cover (like a tarp), electronic gear and ammunition (frankly, to me ammunition seems the most important of these provisions and yet the most weighty).

Here is a side bar comment about cover.  You can purchase a tarp covering from Lowe’s or similar store, but I constructed my own by using house wrap (used for vapor barrier) in 12′ X 12′, double-side-taped the edges with Gorilla Tape, and then used grommets (purchased from Lowe’s) to place holes in the corners and middle.  It makes a perfect covering in the absence of a weighty tent if you have cordage and trekking poles, and if you can find a housing contractor to give you a piece of house wrap, the supplies cost $15.  You can also use the hole in the middle and some cordage to lift the center of the tarp above the rest of it, making provision for water run off.

But even something like this isn’t weight-free.  So I understand that the premier concern is weight.  Hard decisions must be made.  But here is the crux of the issue.  Do not ever carry one bug out gun.  Have a bug out gun, and a backup, and a backup to that one if you can carry it.  And enough ammunition for all of them.

David Codrea:

… the US Rifle M1 caliber .30-06 a gas operated, clip fed, air-cooled semiautomatic shoulder weapon weighing 9.5 lbs. Yes that one, the primary infantry shoulder arm that won WW II.

“Our HIGH SCHOOL armory had 50 of these, two Browning Automatic Rifles, five M1 carbines, two .45 cal. semi auto M1911A1 pistols, and one M3 submachine gun,” he continued. “Similar armories were present at even INNER CITY High Schools like Lindbloom, Marshall, Farragutt and most every school that had a junior ROTC, and there was NEVER a school shooting or any one harmed by the presence of these lethal military weapons.

I want to go back in time and attend this High School.  It goes to show that the problem isn’t guns or even access to them.  The problem is and always has been evil in the heart of man, and no law, no government program, no social engineering scheme, and no amount of intelligentsia with law degrees and master’s degrees in social work and international studies making rules and regulations for us peasants, will ever change that.

That’s what frustrates the statists so much.  They see evil, but they don’t understand it.  They cannot control it – they do not understand its origin, or its solution.  So they participate in it themselves in an attempt to eradicate it.  They want to bring in utopia, but they fail and become what they seek to remedy – evil itself – evil in the onerous rule they force on others.  It’s all a problem of world view, and their’s is doomed to failure at the outset.

Read it all at Examiner.

In Gun Companies Holding The States Accountable we discussed a two pronged approach to addressing the anti-gun legislation that is brewing in certain states, New York, Illinois and Colorado being three key locations. The first of the two prongs involves a refusal to sell to law enforcement when the weapons being sought are prohibited to non-law enforcement.  At the time, LaRue Tactical, Olympic Arms, Templar Custom and Extreme Firepower had enacted policies against selling to law enforcement in New York. The second prong involved the courtship of firearms manufacturers to move to more gun friendly states.  I have mentioned that Remington Arms, Rock River Arms, Springfield Armory and Kimber were prime candidates for this courtship, and I had made a special plea for Remington to relocate to South Carolina along with other firearms industries to move to the South in general. Since publication of these articles there have been other firearms manufacturers who have joined the boycott of New York law enforcement.  Joining the expanding group are the following companies.

• Bullwater Enterprises
• Westfork Armory
• Smith Enterprise
• Alex Arms
• Spike’s Tactical
• Quality Arms
• Liberty Suppressors
• Doublestar Corp
• American Spirit Arms
• Trident Armory
• Head Down Products
• J&G Sales

Barrett Arms has also joined the group, issuing the following statement.

Barrett’s Position Regarding the Assault on Liberty February 20, 2013 Barrett opposes those who are illegally disarming the American public from their efficient arms and creating superior armed elitist government agencies. Elected state officials of New York, having been sworn to protect our Constitution, have instead committed an offense against it and their citizens by stripping inalienable rights duly protected and guaranteed under the Second Amendment. By their deliberate and sinister actions, these officials now cause their state and local policing agencies to enforce these unconstitutional and illegal so called “laws”. By current law, Barrett cannot be an accomplice with any lawbreaker, therefore, cannot and will not service or sell to New York government agencies. Barrett also applies this stance to the individual elected official who, as a matter of public record, has voted for or created regulation that violates the constitutional rights of their citizens. This is an expansion of our 2002 ban against the California government due to their second amendment infringements, and shall apply to any future violators.

Additionally, the states are lining up to court firearms manufacturers.  South Carolina wants Remington and is telling them so.  Magpul has threatened to leave Colorado if the law is passed prohibiting the very magazines (PMAGs) made in their factories.  Alabama is recruiting Magpul, along with Texas, and Oklahoma is in competition with South Carolina in its quest for Remington. New York Governor Cuomo has stated that “There is no shortage of responsible venders who would want to assist New York’s law enforcement agencies keep New Yorkers safe.”  Perhaps there are still those who will supply firearms and firearms parts and accessories to New York law enforcement.  Colt is still smarting from losing the M4 contract with the Army. But the list of non-participants is dwindling rapidly, and it is best for reputable firearms manufacturers to make their decision sooner rather than later.

I had previously mentioned that I had sent notes to Smith and Wesson, Rock River Arms, Remington, Glock, Sig Sauer, Springfield Armory and Kimber asking for their official position on selling to law enforcement in states that have anti-gun policies.  I have received no response from these companies. Making decisions of this kind are major events in the life of a company.  Relinquishing revenue is serious stuff, and decisions like that are usually made at the board of directors level.  On the other hand, gun companies who lead the pack are also usually rewarded in the American civilian market, and this market is far more valuable than law enforcement or even military. Pressure on these companies is appropriate, and they need to hear from you concerning the totalitarian measures being taken in anti-gun states.  Who will be the first really large firearms company to refuse to sell to these states?  Once this first domino falls, the rest will follow.

UPDATE #1: Michelle Malkin has an article up focusing mainly on manufacturing aspects of this issue, although also briefly discussing the boycott of anti-gun states.  She has good information that complements my own.

UPDATE #2: reddit/guns has the most comprehensive list of companies to date that are participating in the boycott.

Courtesy of NC Gun Blog and refusetosell.org.  It is still necessary for the large companies to participate.  Reddit/guns has a list of e-mail addresses to whom you can write.

UPDATE #3: David Codrea has some salient thoughts.  “I’m reminded of “Braveheart,” where the titled and propertied lairds cut their own deals with Longshanks and withdrew from the field, leaving the freedom fighters to take all the risks and suffer all the losses. It’s past time the entire industry was put on notice and then held accountable for any cowardice in this time of threat on all fronts.”

UPDATE #4: Thanks to Ron for the link at reddit/guns.

Soon to the report – but first a little story.

Once upon a time some teenagers were racing hot rods down Ocean Drive in Myrtle Beach, S.C.  Tourists were hit by one of these kids, and so the townsfolk came together and decided that something must be done to make things safer.  The decided on a plan, and even had a real time, in-situ display of their new ideas for the voters before the town voted on it.

They all got together that day and after speeches about “caring for the children,” and waded into the ocean, each participant having another participant (they called him their swimming buddy) within 20 feet of him, both to the right and left.  No one, according to the new ordinance, would be allowed to swim in the ocean, night or day, without buddies within 20 feet.  It would all be monitored by cameras and enforced by newly hired police officers.

Some of the townsfolk objected that no one could ever swim again because the line of buddies would never end since a person would have to be flanked on both sides, and thus the stipulations could not be logically met, but the participants told the objectors to “shut up, just because.”  Others objected that this all had nothing whatsoever to do with High School kids racing hot rods on Ocean Drive, but the partipants and local politicians all told them to “shut up, just because.”  And besides, “think about the children.”  And then, “shut up.”

I hope that this little parable has been a useful introduction to what seems to be coming down the road.

No surprise but newsworthy insofar as I think this is the first time a Republican as prominent as McCain has talked openly about some new form of gun control passing Congress. If you’re not sure what he means when he refers to the plan Coburn and Schumer are working on, read this. They’re going to close the “gun-show loophole” but carve out exceptions for family transfers and maybe for people who’ve already been vetted for concealed carry. How many votes will there be for that? Well, they’ll start at 58: Coburn and Mark Kirk are part of the group that’s working on a compromise bill and McCain’s already hinting that he’s a yes, so add those three to the Democrats’ 55 (no Dem would dare oppose a measure that might complicate Obama’s “Republican obstructionism” message on gun control). Collins and Murkowski are always gimmes on big bipartisan initiatives too, so there you go — 60 votes for cloture, although there’s bound to be many, many more than that. Follow the last link for your reminder that expanded background checks is the one gun-control measure that polls fantastically well across party lines. Even Lindsey Graham, who needs to protect his right flank in case of a primary challenge in South Carolina next year, is open to some form of new background checks albeit not the Democratic plan. You might see a majority of House Republicans vote no, partly as a symbolic rejection of further gun-control regulations and partly to distinguish themselves from the squishy RINOs in the Senate for the benefit of red-district voters, but it’s going to pass that chamber too with bipartisan support. When push comes to shove, I think Boehner would rather violate the “Hastert Rule” and push this thing through with mostly Democratic votes than risk handing Obama a potential weapon for 2014 by rejecting something that even many Senate Republicans support.

Regular readers know my view.  Universal background checks are a pretext for and necessary prerequisite to a national gun registry, and a national gun registry is a precondition for gun confiscations.  Furthermore, none of this has anything to do with the shootings that have been in the news lately.  And finally, we’ll see how that exception goes where they want to carve out provisions for transfer of firearms to children.  Give it some time – it will turn totalitarian because that’s the way totalitarian systems work.

But remember this fact about the entire conversation.  None of this is related to the antecedent events.  The only clear-cut and logical legislative action I support is abolishing gun-free zones.  Everything else is just a smoke screen.

Frum again.

He says he’s working on a full response to my earlier post, but he provides an “appetizer portion” here. He offers a new anecdote of a gun accident, the statistic that there are more than 600 fatal gun accidents per year in the U.S., and an assertion that guns are not regulated like other consumer products.

First of all, the anecdote is a little bizarre. According to the story released by the police department — and I called to confirm — an old man tossed his coat on top of a gun while it was on a dresser, and the gun went off. The sergeant I spoke with said he didn’t think the gun fell to floor; it just went off when the coat hit it. The sergeant said the gun was “not an antique,” but an older-style revolver. Older revolvers are often not designed to be dropped without firing, but they usually have pretty heavy trigger pulls. If this is the way events really unfolded, it’s a one-in-a-million occurrence.

Earlier this week on Twitter, Frum said that people who say guns are safer than cars must not know what a denominator is. So let’s do the math on these 600 fatal accidents. Somewhere between 35 percent and 47 percent of Americans have a gun in the home; to be generous let’s go with the low number and say 100 percent have a car. Back-of-the-envelope math indicates that 600 fatal gun accidents would be the equivalent of 1,700 car fatalities if we’re assessing the average risk of owning one versus the other. There have been more than 30,000 car fatalities almost every year since the mid-1930s.

This is becoming boring.  So let’s grant the fact that older revolvers didn’t have something like the transfer bar in modern day Rugers.  Fine.  Still, unless the hammer was cocked, I don’t believe this story.  It’s a tall tale.  I don’t care that it was “confirmed” by a phone call.  Without the hammer being cocked, there is no mechanism to make this happen.

However, let’s go ahead and set the framework for Frum.  It is a gun.  It is not safe.  Got it?  That’s why we have rules like knowing your backstop, observing muzzle discipline, observing trigger discipline, securring it from children, and so forth.

It is not safe similar to the fact that automobiles aren’t safe, operating power equipment isn’t safe, and any of a host of activities in which we engage daily aren’t safe.  It isn’t safe to cross the street in my city on foot, even when you have the right-of-way.

Any activity can be made safer by observing the rules and having proper discipline.  The fact that Frum keeps trotting out anecdotal evidence of people who do not observe these rules only means that he thinks we’re stupid.  Rather, it is Frum who embarrasses himself because he can’t understand the ameliorative effects of good behavior.  Or he doesn’t want to because of his long, dark experiment into progressive ideology.

Prior: Further Proof That David Frum Is An Idiot

The Washington Times:

Gun-control and gun-rights advocates are locked in a fierce dispute over what rank-and-file National Rifle Association members and average gun owners think about President Obama’s gun-control proposals, with the NRA sharply rebutting numbers purporting to show that its members and gun owners are largely receptive to new laws.

According to polling conducted by the gun-control advocacy group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, whose co-chairman is New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, 74 percent of NRA members support requiring a criminal background check on anyone purchasing a gun.

But the NRA says that is not the case.

“Mayor Bloomberg’s claims that gun owners are divided are totally false,” said Chris Cox, the group’s chief lobbyist. “It is nothing more than an attempt by anti-gun activists to further their long-standing political agenda.”

In response to such figures, the NRA recently released its own survey — touting it as “the only legitimate survey of NRA members in existence.” The gun-rights group noted that the mayors’ group and other recent surveys did not have access to NRA membership rolls and thus their polls could not reliably sample its membership.

The poll of 1,000 NRA members shows that 89 percent oppose a ban on military-style, semi-automatic weapons and 92 percent oppose a ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The group says the numbers prove that members are “united in their desire for Washington to focus on keeping firearms from the mentally ill and to reject unconstitutional gun control measures that infringe on Second Amendment rights.”

But Sen. Christopher Murphy, Connecticut Democrat, said gun owners and NRA members generally agree that strengthening background checks is a good idea …

“The NRA and its lobby — especially when it comes to the debate we’re having right now in Washington — is badly out of step with the people that the NRA claims to represent,” Mr. Murphy said on a conference call Monday.

The polls showing that NRA members want universal background checks are lies.  All of them.  They are fabricated by gun-grabbers who have no problem coloring the truth, making up things or saying things they know to be outright lies.

However, Chris is trying to persuade his buddies to come join him in his quest for totalitarianism.

U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy is trying to convince his former colleagues in the House and his new colleagues in the Senate that there won’t be any retribution from gun owners at the polls, if they do the right thing and vote in favor of common sense gun control legislation.

Chris is a naive simpleton if he believes that.  If he doesn’t, he is willing to throw his colleagues under the bus.  We gun owners never forget, and we do and will take retribution.

Be wise and cautious.  Don’t do things from which there is no return.

Crazy uncle Joe in his own words.

“You don’t need an AR-15, it’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use,” he stressed.

Biden indicated that he has given his own wife the same advice. “I said, ‘Jill, if there’s ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, put that double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house,’” he said, and urged viewers, in closing, “Buy a shotgun, buy a shotgun!”

Right.  Hand a double-barrel (I assume, 12 gauge) shotgun to a potentially small frame woman, tell her to shoot both barrels into the air, wasting her shots and leaving her defenseless, and dispense with actually aiming a weapon.

My dumb-ass dog is smarter than him.  Seriously.  Folks, do … not … ever … take an approach like this in situations of threat to your person.  Ever.  There are so many things wrong with this it’s hard to know where to begin.  First of all, do not ever leave yourself no means of egress if you are under threat, and do not ever approach the person who is threatening you.  In Castle-doctrine states you don’t have to retreat in your own home, but that’s different than recommending that someone walk out of their home.

Second, the choice of weapons should be up to the shooter, but a 12 gauge shotgun has some kick, and she may not be able to handle it.  The 5.56 mm round has much less recoil, aided by the buffer spring in the AR which absorbs much of the recoil.  Finally, no self defense expert recommends warning shots.  In fact, forget self defense experts.  No serious person anywhere recommends warning shots.

Just please.  Seriously.  Do not ever do what he is recommending.  He’s just crazy uncle Joe being himself.

Believe it or not.

Manufacturers are looking into new sensor and biometric technology to restrict gun use to the owner.

They’re called smart guns. When placing a sensor ring on the gun, it shoots. Without it, it can’t.

It’s part of technology designed so only the authorized user can fire the weapon.
Another design uses biometric technology that recognizes your grip.

“One of the major designs is where it accepts either a fingerprint or a thumb print so it will release the firing pin or the trigger area so that it can fire, so if it doesn’t recognize it, it won’t allow the gun to fire,” says Santa Maria gun shop manager Joe Degeus.

Making it useless, if the gun were to fall into the hands of a child or a criminal.

“It is kind of like James Bond,” says Degeus. “But you got to remember, with technology comes the opportunity for more mistakes.”

Gun owners say it sounds good in theory but argue the technology is lacking.

“If that system jams up or if we have a problem with it, I’m in a bad situation,” says gun owner Joshua Miller. “Because the criminal that’s coming at me…he’s not going to have any limitations so his gun’s going to fire every time.”

Take it from a registered professional engineer.  You see that picture above with the solid state electronics inside the gun?  It is obscene.  Not only that, it’s stupid.

There are even old school shooters who don’t believe in such a thing as the grip safety (Beaver tail) on my XDm.  I am not among that crowd, but the notion that I would rely on a gun with solid state electronics for my own protection is absurd, leaving aside the problems I have with it being amenable to governmental control.

Every gun you have should be capable of personal defense.  Some guns (and cartridges) are better for concealment, some better for target shooting, some better for more sophisticated and formal competition such as 3-gun or IDPA, some are better for hunting, and some are best for personal defense.

But whether .17 HMR, 5.6 mm or .338, every gun you have should be at least minimally capable of use in some sort of defensive situation, even if not the best suited for that purpose.  This is true because you might be in a position where you have to pick it up and use it for that very purpose in a crisis.

Having solid state electronics as yet another failure mode in any of those guns is not an option for me, and I suspect, for 99% of all other shooters.  So here’s a note to manufacturers.  You go right ahead and “dabble” in smart gun technology.  I will purchase such a gun when hell freezes over.

Bob Owens discusses the fact that a growing number of companies are refusing to do business with New York and other states over unconstitutional gun laws.  More specifically, if a citizen cannot have a particular weapon, then law enforcement doesn’t get it either.

Mountain Guerrilla also weighs in with some direct contact e-mail addresses with the gun companies.  I also have some (one for Rock River Arms), and I intend to send notes around on this issue.

I have strongly advocated that Remington relocate to South Carolina (and that other firearms manufacturers relocate to different states, such as Kimber, Rock River Arms, Springfield Armory, etc.), and CBS News did a segment that showed that this kind of thing might be making a difference.

I realize that this is slightly off subject if we’re discussing manufacturers holding the states accountable for double standards, but this isn’t really that far off subject.  Most good people are hard workers, and I have put in my share of time for my company, including unpaid time.

But I once worked with a man whom I respect who held that this can and often does turn counterproductive in work, family and church.  The more we fill in the gaps for people, the less people feel the effects of their actions and decisions.  It keeps people from learning.  When we work hard to undo bad managerial decisions, management makes the same decisions again.  When we block consequences from our children, they don’t grow up.  I have begun to take my friend’s view in almost every walk of life.

When states abuse its citizens, they should lose business, respect and revenue.  States like New York, with its new assault weapons ban, and Illinois with the continued fight against even concealed carry anywhere in the state, don’t deserve the gun companies, and their states’ law enforcement agencies don’t deserve the best firearms.  Bad actions are needful of consequences in order to rectify those actions.

Furthermore, as I’ve pointed out before, the hypocrisy is just rich and a remarkable thing to behold.  States that ban weapons because they are “evil and inflict damage to innocent lives” but allow their manufacture because of revenue just aren’t worthy to be taken seriously.  This is happening in Colorado as we speak.

At Guns For Everyone, we learn that Colorado wants the ban Magpul’s magazines, but wants their money.

As Colorado state legislators debate HB 13-1224 – a bill that would ban magazines over 15 rounds – an issue arose around Magpul and its base of operations here in Colorado.

Magpul has vowed to leave the state if a magazine restriction is passed in any form.

To appease Magpul, and presumably to keep it’s reported 600 jobs and $85 million in taxable revenue in the state, Representative Joe Salazar announced an amendment to HB 13-1224, L.0.14, that would specifically exempt Magpul from this legislation in as far as they would still be welcome to manufacture and sell these black high capacity ammunition clip death machines to civilians, just not to Coloradans.

When House Republicans pointed out the obvious and blatant hypocrisy of this amendment, House Democrat Rhonda Fields insisted that the amendment was intended to allow Magpul to continue to sell these magazines to law enforcement and to the military because “the military protects the company…Country” (check the record, her slip of the tongue was real and darkly accurate).

This is a preposterous excuse for wanting Magpul to stay in Colorado and we know that she is lying.  Selling magazines to law enforcement and the military wouldn’t even come close to the business they do for the civilian market.

Kimber and Remington moving from New York, and Rock River Arms and Springfield Armory moving from Illinois, and Magpul moving from Colorado, is best for the citizens of those states, as well as the country as a whole, even if it causes pain for a while (or otherwise, if they don’t relocate, the laws need to be reversed as a precondition for their staying).  Likewise, firearms and ammunition companies shouldn’t be doing business with such states.  A principled stand like this also causes increased respect within the firearms community.  And we are a paying bunch of people.  We put our money where our mouth is.

UPDATE: Magpul is threatening to leave if the Colorado bill is passed into law.  I have sent e-mails to Rock River Arms, Smith and Wesson, Springfield Armory, Glock, Remington and Magpul about their positions regarding the state boycott.  I have yet to receive any responses.

Saturday was raw, cold and mixed frozen precipitation.  That didn’t matter, as the lines to get into the Metrolina Expo Center were long, approximately a three hour wait.  I saw cars from at least North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Texas and New Jersey.  I’ve been to this gun show for years and I’ve never seen it this crowded.

Feeling were rather raw along with the weather, and there were many angry comments in line about the administration and their enablers in the Congress and Senate.

By the time we all got inside (they were letting people go in at the same rate people were coming out), we all made a bee-line for the bathroom (coffee + three hours).  As a note to planners, it might pay to put a Porta-jon or two near the line.  It would make for less irate patrons.

Inside there were plenty of ARs for sale, other semi-automatics, plenty of pistols, revolvers, and shotguns (and one very nice Springfield Armory M1A Super Match for $2700).  Tactical shotguns were in shorter supply than anything else.  I did notice that there is a plethora of new tactical flashlights, seemingly good ones, with high lumen output.  It’s nice to see competition, and flashlights seem to be the area that has sustained the most competition.  It might be some time before all of those brands have been stress tested and compared against one another.

ARs were selling for 1.5 – 2 times what I paid.  PMAGs (which I bought) were plentiful even though there is a long waiting list when ordering directly over the web.  Unfortunately, they were going for twice what I paid several years ago.  I went primarily for the ammunition though, and this is where it gets sad.

5.56 mm cartridges are going for $1 per round.  You just cannot find it for less, at least not right now.  I fear that the days of $.50 per round are gone forever.  M1 Carbine ammunition is very scarce, although I did find some.  .45, .40, .38 and all of the standard caliber handgun ammunition seemed plentiful enough to meet the demand, at least early in the show, both in target (FMJ and MC) and personal defense rounds.  Within hours supplies were noticeably diminished.

The one standout was 9 mm.  What was once the most ubiquitous round in America cannot be found.  There were a few boxes of personal defense rounds, but no target rounds.  There were stories from the dealers about selling 9 mm handguns to customers back at their stores and then getting complaints that the customers bought guns for which there was no ammunition.

The best deal at the show was the going price for XDm .40.  My own opinion, being both an XDm owner and S&W M&P owner, is that the XDm is a tighter, more well balanced weapon.  It’s all a matter of personal opinion, but when they’re selling XDms for $530, there is no debate.

The most common opinion at the gun show?  To a man and woman, everyone blames the administration and its enablers for this high-gun-price and ammunition shortage situation.  Like most other crises on the planet, this one is entirely man-made.  The self-proclaimed ruling class should take note.  The peasants are angry.  Really angry.  At all of you.  And they don’t consider themselves peasants.  They would use the term sovereign citizens.