Paul Harrell being himself.

Sorry boys.  No posts tonight.  Power outage.  Return ASAP.

This is a debate I want to steer clear of, except to say that I think any civilian should be able to purchase any guns or tactical equipment available to the U.S. military.  I also think that pretending isn’t doing, and while pretension over YouTube is innocent enough (and I really don’t care about that sort of thing even though it seems to bother Dakota), the real problem with this sort of thing is with militarized police.  I notice Dakota Meyer says nothing about that.  Militarized police are the standing army that so worried the American founders.  Let’s see Dakota take that one on.  How about it, Dakota?  I think it would be awesome if a MoH winner would point out to SWAT teams around the nation that they should fly across the pond if they really want to do that sort of thing, and that Americans have rights.  So are you all in on this?

On another front (and changing the subject, for which I don’t apologize), following the comments on this video, and then on to other comments on other forums, and so on down the road like a spider web, I notice that there is an awful lot of apprehension in the reports given by Marcus Luttrell in his after action report and book.  I have said a good bit about Operation Red Wings, and I may have more to say about this operation in the future.

But for now it’s enough to point out that the operation was a total flop, and the main instigator of the trouble, Ahmad Shah, and his band of bad boys, had to be killed by Marines in Operation Whalers.  The Navy SEALs learned of Marine Corps plans and decided to take the action away from Marines.  This was a huge mistake.

Finally, I’ll point out two more things about Operation Red Wings.  First from Mohammad Gulab, who saved Marcus, and next, from a Marine Corps infantry officer.

On the night of June 27, 2005, with a sense of dread creeping over him, Luttrell and his fellow SEALs—Michael Murphy, Matthew Axelson and Danny Dietz—headed out for a recon mission in a dangerous part of Kunar province near the Pakistani border. A sniper and a medic, Luttrell packed a scoped military assault rifle and 11 magazines—three more than usual, he wrote in Lone Survivor.

While Luttrell wrote that he fired round after round during the battle, Gulab says the former SEAL still had 11 magazines of ammunition when the villagers rescued him—all that he had brought on the mission.

Gulab wasn’t the first to question the accuracy of Lone Survivor. In his 2009 book, Victory Point, the journalist Ed Darack wrote about the 2nd Battalion of the 3rd Marine Regiment in Afghanistan, the unit that planned the mission. He uncovered a bevy of discrepancies in Luttrell’s account. Some are small: He got the name of the operation wrong—it was Red Wings, like the hockey team, not Redwing. Others are more significant: The target, Ahmad Shah, wasn’t an international terrorist or a close bin Laden associate. He was the head of a small Taliban-linked militia. Citing reports gleaned from phone and radio intercepts, Darack estimates only eight to 10 militants attacked the SEALs, not 80 to 200. In fact, two graphic videos the gunmen shot during the firefight show only seven men in Shah’s militia.

“[Luttrell’s claims] are exaggerated nonsense,” says Patrick Kinser, a former Marine infantry officer who participated in Operation Red Wings and read the former SEAL’s after action report. “I’ve been at the location where he was ambushed multiple times. I’ve had Marines wounded there. I’ve been in enough firefights to know that when shit hits the fan, it’s hard to know how many people are shooting at you. [But] there weren’t 35 enemy fighters in all of the Korengal Valley [that day].”

Take careful note.  I’m not saying that Luttrell’s account is wrong or exaggerated.  Others are saying that.  I make no claim to knowing these things for certain.  But I think it’s interesting, and I also think there is a lot more study to be done about this fateful operation, why it should never have been conducted, and the specific failures in personnel, weapons, tactics, techniques and procedures.

I’ve often wondered why the SEALs would have taken radio equipment only to be frustrated by mountains when trying to communicate their predicament (and ultimately killing Murphy), when they could have carried a sat phone with a MilStar uplink?

But one thing is for sure by all accounts, including post-mortem and forensic reviews.  Matthew Axelson was a stud.  He continued to lay down fires even after being shot in the head, up to and including emptying both his rifle and pistol and all backup magazines.

This is a story that in my opinion is yet to be fully told.

Prior: A Marine Corps View Of Tactics In Operation Red Wings

Index Journal.

How will local law enforcement go about enforcing a law that allows CWP holders to openly carry handguns?

McCormick Police Chief Bo Willis said he has received numerous phone calls from people asking about the open carry law. While he hasn’t had any problems with people openly carrying before the law’s enactment date, he said last week he’s still waiting on guidance from SLED on how to enforce the law.

The Index Journal hasn’t gotten answers from SLED because SLED doesn’t yet understand.  I’ve tried to explain it.

That’s what LEOs in Texas thought as well – we’ll just walk up and demand to see permits when a call comes in.

That’s not the way this worked out in Texas, and it’s not the way it will work out in South Carolina.  You see, in order to conduct a stop, LEOs need to ensure that it’s a valid “Terry Stop.”  In other words, you have to suspect that a crime has been or is being committed, or else the stop isn’t legal.

It’s not good enough to say that the individual is openly carrying a weapon.  To be sure, if someone is openly carrying and commits a crime leading to detention or arrest, and you ascertain that the individual has no permit, then you can charge him with a crime under the new law.  But then, you could have charged him with a crime under the concealed handgun law as well.  Nothing has changed.

You need to pretend that you can’t see the weapon, because that’s the way the carefully worded law is written.  This is what’s going to happen the first few times such a stop is conducted by LEOs for open carriers.

LEO: “Sir, I need to see your permit.”

Person A: “Sure, but you’re being videoed and this video will end up in court, and I need to ask you two questions.  First of all, am I being detained, and if so, do you suspect me of a crime?  In other words, is this a so-called “Terry Stop?”  Second question.  Does S.C. have a “stop and identify statute?”

The LEO is in a very hard place.  If the LEO says that person A is suspected of a crime, the proper response is, “What crime?”  To which he can give no valid response.  If the LEO says that person A is not suspected of a crime, question #2 becomes salient, and I assure you, S.C. has no stop and identify statute.

In other words, it is not legal for a LEO to conduct this stop for openly carrying.  Finally, you should read the bill again.  The open carry bill approved into law by the governor does not expand S.C. to include any sort of stop and identify stipulation, either under this statute or any other.  You can read it again for yourself.

Here is a much better idea.  Train your 911 operators to respond to callers with this information: “Ma’am, open carry is now legal in S.C.  Are you calling to report any other criminal activities?  Is this person brandishing the weapon or threatening anyone?  If not, we need to hang up.”

If you don’t follow this counsel, the two questions I posed above will be heard in court very soon.

SLED doesn’t know how they’re going to enforce the new law because South Carolina has no stop and identify statute, and neither should it.

You cannot (and should not be able to) stop someone who is doing nothing illegal.  The law as signed stipulates that a permit is required to be able to legally openly carry in S.C.  But there is no provision in existing statutory framework or in the recently signed open carry bill that makes provision for stopping people who are openly carrying to demand identification and permit.

But despite my best efforts, I cannot seem to interest anyone in the coming problems.  It’s not a problem to me, especially since I believe the S.C. legislature should have passed constitutional carry.  No permit should be required.

But it will soon be a problem with law enforcement if they think they are going to stop every open carrier they see to demand identification.

And by the way, try to reach any South Carolina law enforcement via email, whether Sheriff’s Association, city law enforcement, county law enforcement, or SLED.  It cannot be done.  They do not make their email addresses known to the public.

I’ve always had my eyes on this particular wheel gun, and I agree with his assessment of how pleasant and easy the .22 magnum is to shoot.

There was a recently flurry of articles on Korth Revolvers.  Handguns Magazine had one very comprehensive article.

The NXR’s overall length is 11.65 inches, width is 1.72 inches, and height is 6.38 inches. Suggested retail price starts at $5,299 and goes up depending upon any additional features you’d like to add, say, a compensator. That kind of price places the NXR out of reach of a lot of shooters, but is the Korth’s price commensurate with its performance?

Range testing .44 Magnum revolvers can be a real bear, but as .44s go, the Korth NXR is quite manageable to shoot. That oversize, Jim Wilson-inspired Turkish walnut grip really fills the hand, and it provides a comfortable and secure grip on the gun. Plus, like I said, the large, flat base of the grips worked well shooting off the bench.

Also at Special Ops Magazine.

In use the Korth Combat is pleasant to shoot and as accurate as might be expected, capable of delivering tight groups in single-action mode, slightly larger in double-action. So far as performance goes, I would say that it is on a par with other high-quality revolvers; the finish, inside and out is excellent, the design good; but I cannot honestly see where the high price is justified in any concrete manner.

And finally at Shooting Illustrated.

The successor to the innovative Korth Ranger, the NXS is Korth’s first eight-shot .357 Mag. wheelgun. An eight-shot 9 mm cylinder is also available as an upgrade that will allow you to switch effortlessly between the two popular calibers.

It’s a beautiful gun, a work of art.  But something would have to be wrong for me to spend that kind of scratch for a handgun, unless I had money to burn.  Then again, there are an awful lot of people with large boats, property on the lake and high paying jobs that might not even wink at the price.

Does any reader have a Korth or know anyone who has one?  Perhaps Korth would send me a gun for testing and review.

Via WiscoDave.

Pentagon approves two drones made in China for use by U.S. military.

— DEFCONWarningSystem (@DEFCONWSALERTS) June 2, 2021

What more is there to say, really?

In the title of the post I’ll go ahead and say it so that everything is clear.  If I was left with only a single option for weapons to hunt or use for personal defense or defense of home and hearth, I’d choose a shotgun, or better year, several shotguns.

You can hunt deer with it, you can hunt fowl with it, you can defend yourself against large predators (such as bear) with it, and you can defend home and hearth with it.  Indeed, the range is limited to 50 yards or less, but there is no single weapon that can solve every problem.

As for tactical shotguns, there are two on the market that are considered the best of the best: The Benelli M4 and the Beretta 1301, especially enhanced by Langdon Tactical.

The 18.5″ barrel for the 1301 patterns tight and some use it unmodified for turkey hunting, and if you want more barrel length it accepts a choke.

I simply cannot imagine anyone saying that the tactical shotgun is useless, especially when using 00 buck it will launch eight 9mm size balls at 1500 FPS.  I don’t know who they’re talking about in the video below, but I’d be wary of anyone who said something like that.

In other shotgun news, the Beretta A400 appears yet again in lists of the top shotguns available for multipurpose use.

Via Ken, this disturbing report from Virginia.

In one of the most disturbing tales to come from Richmond, Virginia’s moves to erase history, they are now planning to dig up the grave of Confederate General Ambrose Powell Hill, according to a new report.

To make the matter even more ghoulish, the city has not actually come up with a plan yet on what to do with his remains that have been in the location since 1892.

General Hill had requested he be buried under the memorial in his will …

Good Lord.

This is what John Calvin remarks of Amos 2:1.

… for the Prophet, I doubt not, charges the Moabites with barbarous cruelty. To dig up the bodies of enemies, and to burn their bones, — this is an inhuman deed, and wholly barbarous. But it was more detestable in the Moabites, who had some connection with the people of Edom; for they descended from the same family; and the memory of that relationship ought to have continued, since Abraham brought up Lot, the father of the Moabites; and thus the Moabites were under an obligation to the Idumeans. If then any humanity existed in them, they ought to have restrained their passions, so as not to treat so cruelly their brethren. Now, when they exceeded all moderation in war, and raged against dead bodies, and burnt the bones of the dead, it was, as I have said, an extremely barbarous conduct. The meaning then is, that the Moabites could no longer be borne with; for in this one instance, they gave an example of savage cruelty.

This is what critical race theory has come to – grave desecration.

I’ll tell you what.  I wouldn’t want to be in any way involved with, a part of, or even near this idea or event.  I wouldn’t watch it, I wouldn’t run the heavy equipment, I wouldn’t touch the remains, and I wouldn’t try to help by picking alternative sites.

I’d stay as far away from this as is humanly possible.