Archive for the 'Guns' Category

Shooting Illustrated.

Both UPS and FedEx allow only FFLs, law enforcement agencies and specific governmental entities to ship and receive firearms of any type, for any reason. That means unless you happen to be an FFL, you’ll have to enlist the services of one to both send your rifle to a gunsmith or to a manufacturer for warranty repairs, or to receive your rifle from either. An added complication is that in order for FFLs to use UPS or FedEx for this purpose, they must first apply for and receive approval to be a firearm shipper from the company they want to use. As an FFL myself, I can attest that this process is neither simple nor a hoop that every FFL will choose to jump through. UPS takes it one step further by requiring that firearm parts only be shipped by FFLs as well. What constitutes a firearm part? According to the UPS representative who serviced my old account, UPS considers a firearm part to be “anything that would be assembled to make a gun or added to a gun,” such as magazines, small parts, aftermarket furniture or any other components.

Moving on to brighter skies, USPS appears to mirror federal guidelines when it comes to the shipping of rifles. “Publication 52” is the postal service’s main-source document for firearm-shipping rules. According to section 432.3, so long as the rifle is unloaded and all other laws (state, local, etc.) are in full compliance, a non-FFL may mail a rifle to another non-FFL within the sender’s state of residence. Outside of one’s state of residence, it may be mailed to an FFL or to yourself (in care of someone else), in advance of your arrival at the destination address. Specific rules are outlined for each of these situations, so check local, state and USPS regulations before shipping that family heirloom off into the wild blue yonder, whether for repair or use in a different state.

USPS regulations are elusive on the topic of FFLs returning firearms to their lawful owners. However, “27 CFR § 478.148” states that an FFL may return a firearm (or like replacement) to its owner across state lines. There are no restrictions on shipping firearm components and parts through USPS, except that receivers and frames that ATF classifies as firearms must be shipped as firearms.

[ … ]

USPS requires that you declare the firearm and certify that it is unloaded before handing your package over to them. At no time may ammunition be shipped with a firearm (regardless of shipping method). You may be required to show a copy of the receiving FFL’s license and include a copy of your driver’s license with the firearm as well. A note for the receiving party is always a good idea. One of my outgoing rifle shipments, also last year, arrived at the receiving end completely out of the box. In fact, there was no box at all, just a rifle in a case. Thankfully, the paperwork was also in the case, so the receiving gun shop had sufficient information to be able to contact me for guidance.

Even though long-gun shipping has become more complicated in recent months, it’s still not overly difficult. By following the relevant laws and shippers’ rules, you can get your rifle where it needs to be without much fanfare.

I think the bottom line is that we’re probably going to have to either [a] drive it to where it needs to go, or [b] go through an FFL.  FFLs know it’s necessary to ask them for this service, so they charge for it.  I don’t blame them – the FFL costs money to maintain.

The murky thing is “firearm parts.”  Thus far I haven’t had any problems ordering things like ammunition, charging handles, BCGs, etc., and I’ve received barrels in the mail before.

But you can count on the federal code making things as difficult as possible.

This topic is important to me because I’ve had five or so concealed carry guns and nine or ten holsters. I spent money I shouldn’t have to find the right weapon and manner of carry for me. Most of the training about how to find a carry gun is terrible, as the video points out.

He waits until the 13th minute to discuss what really should be the very first thing any trainer touches on with regard to this topic. If you want newbies to have fun and be comfortable, that’s a good start but what we want in order to make new freedom lovers who take the defense of self and family seriously is confidence.

Building confidence from the start is key. If somebody with minimal experience doesn’t have confidence in the weapon and themselves, they won’t practice or carry the firearm.

The first confidence-building step is to rent guns, lots of them, to find the one they can hit with. This might mean more than one trip to the range, returning to narrow down the two or three that seemed good to the new shooter.

We should never talk new shooters into buying features they don’t want, such as safety, specific types of sights, caliber, etc. Speaking of which, caliber doesn’t matter if they have no confidence in the gun and no confidence in their ability with it because they won’t carry it in that case. A small caliber gun you can hit with and have confidence in is better than a bazooka left in the safe because you won’t carry it.

How a firearm feels in your hand is a sales counter technique, not a serious-minded way to find the right gun. You must shoot the guns to find the one you will have confidence in and carry every day.

He does address the ability to hit, draw-ability, and biomechanics, but really, the ability to hit is primary because from that comes the confidence to practice all other aspects. Even if you’ve owned several handguns, rent, before your next concealed carry purchase, rent several firearms.

Be flexible in how you will carry. Most people get a picture in their mind of how they will carry; then they buy the tools for that style only to find it doesn’t fit their job, or around children, any number of factors, or it hurts their back, etc. Find the gun you can shoot, then find the carry method for that gun that is appropriate for your life circumstances.

I ended up going with outside the waistband carry under an untucked shirt because that’s the best way for me to carry the weapon I can hit with. I never wanted to or thought I would end up carrying this way. But I can draw and hit; confidence in shooting is why I carry what I do the way I do. I don’t care one iota what gun or holster or carry method or caliber or features all the counter salesmen and high-speed operators think are good, and neither should any newer shooter. Find what works for you through actual shooting!

The video shows a lot of guns and a lot of information, but there are nuggets of good info.

This weapon breaks a lot of traditions in handgun engineering. Here is the article referenced in the video. It has many truly unique design features. You’ll find the design discussion interesting, although effectiveness, durability, usability, and accuracy all remain to be seen. I’d like to shoot it because the way firearms shoot is really what matters.

Made in the USA. New for 2023. Precision trigger. Hammer fired. The reviewer really likes it.

No budget scopes were tested.  He does a fine job of explaining the differences in pictures you can understand.  I have to remark that I do not even have the time or facilities to shoot at distances where these effects would be experienced, so the point is moot for me.  I see no need for me to own a $2000 scope where I live.

Seen at All Outdoors.

See the source for the rest of the story.

Well, it’s certainly different and might be an interesting addition to a lever action collection, but at an MSRP of $2000, why would anyone do this?

At Forgotten Weapons

The Blyskawica (“LIghtning”) is an SMG developed in occupied Poland to be issued out to Home Army units during Operation Tempest; the liberation uprisings planned for the advance of the Red Army into Poland.

The gun was developed starting in September 1942 by two engineers, Wacław Zawrotny and Seweryn Wielanier. Both were smart and talented, but neither had previous experience in arms design. The design they created is both innovative in some areas and inferior in others as a result, with major inspiration coming form the Sten and the MP40. Production was undertaken in the harshest conditions of occupied Warsaw, where just possession of cutting tools required German military permission.* It is a credit to the skill and dedication of the Home Army team that some 750 Błyskawica guns were made; the largest mass production of any underground weapon that I am aware of.

More at the link. And here’s an interesting video of the underground development of this weapon. The weapon is examined in detail as well.

I love it too.  They also bring up what we’ve discussed so many times before, i.e., the virtue of having a handgun and carbine in the same caliber, getting higher muzzle velocity out of the carbine than the handgun.

And by the way, I’m still waiting on that invitation to a hunting trip with Ryan.

Frankly I think I’d rather just stick to a rifle.  But this is useful information if you live in a north midwestern state.

I see someone in the comments posed the question I thought of: what if this test had been done using different wadding, such as Federal Flitecontrol?  Someone ought to send him some ammo to test this question.

I really don’t know much about this whole issue, except that GWACS is an anti-gun organization which serves as a funnel for lawsuits against gun manufacturers.  They apparently paid for some of the information owned by K E Arms some number of years ago, no longer exist, and K E Arms (who didn’t sign a non-compete) is making their polymer lowers as they always have.

Enter the lawyers.  GWACS sued K E Arms, and this source and this source provides some background.

Now, for perhaps the nail in the coffin for GWACS, Ian explains what crowd-sourcing can do to things like this.

Source.

Alabama on Jan. 1 will become the latest state to allow people to carry a concealed handgun without a state permit that requires a background check.

The new state law ends the requirement for a person to get a permit to legally carry a concealed handgun in public. A person can still choose to get a permit if they want to do so.

The proposal had been introduced unsuccessfully for years in Montgomery, before winning approval this year. The legislation was championed by gun rights advocates who call it “constitutional carry,” in reference to the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Opponents, including state sheriffs and others in law enforcement, argued the permits help combat crime and enhance public safety.

[ … ]

The Alabama Sheriffs Association had opposed the legislation. “Alabama sheriffs are clear on the law taking effect Jan. 1 and have adjusted accordingly,” said Lee County Sheriff Jay Jones, president of the Alabama Sheriffs’ Association

Jones and Stringer said there are still reasons a person might consider getting a permit. Jones said, “maintaining an Alabama concealed carry permit is wise when traveling out of state; reciprocity applies — other states may require non-residents to have a permit from their state of residence.”

Boss Hogg won’t be happy with the loss of control or the loss of revenue from the permitting scheme.  But there is this dark language in the law.

Lawmakers included language in the new law reiterating an officer’s ability to temporarily take a handgun during a traffic stop or other investigation. An officer with a reasonable suspicion that a person was about to engage in criminal conduct can temporarily take a handgun and run it through databases to see if the gun was stolen.

An officer could also temporarily take a weapon if it is necessary for the safety of the officer or others. The weapon must be returned unless there is an arrest, or the person is posing a safety threat.

If I’m not mistaken, South Carolina also had to include that language to get open carry passed (constitutional carry still awaits further legislative action).

We’ve discussed this before.  It’s the height of stupidity to touch another man’s weapon.  Don’t do it.  Just don’t.

There is the risk of negligent discharge (and Lord knows there have been plenty of those where LEOs were the ones responsible).  There is the risk of dropping the weapon (which is a problem if someone tries to catch it).  And if no one tries to catch it, a weapon gets scratched and banged up, reducing the resale value of the firearm.  There are various and sundry types of handguns, from no safety, to pistols with trigger brush-guards, to 1911s with a classic safety, SA only, DA/SA pistols, pistols that may have been modified by their owner, etc., etc.

No one can know everything, and to assume that a weapon can exchange hands in all cases without unsafe things happening is the height of arrogance and stupidity.

That language is more likely to cause safety problems than make anyone safer.  There are exceptions of course, when all the rules of gun safety have been and are being followed, there isn’t a round in the chamber, no one muzzle flags anyone else, and so forth, as if you were at the range.  But in such a case, why does exchanging control of the weapon make anyone safer?

Do … not … touch … another … man’s … firearm.  Period.  If it’s being left alone, then continue to leave it alone.  That language in the law is idiotic.