Anti-Gun people occasionally comment on pro-Human-Rights blogs. Blogs like this one, but ones people read. (Thank you my precious few loyal readers. Both of you.) More frequently, they anti on some anti-gun article before they get their hat handed to them by pro-gun commenters that have actual, you know, facts and stuff.
One of the more frequent themes anti-gun hysteric's post is citing the Second Amendment. The Militia part. And think that that ends the argument because the National Guard fill the militia role today. They figure that reading is obvious to anyone with a brain. That our side is illiterate and can’t parse that part.
Their assertion is invalid.
That the Second Amendment applies to individuals, and is an individual right, and not to some form of militia, came up in the Heller decision. It was decided. Shouldn’t they ‘move on’ and pick another angle to harp on? They’d have to appeal some case up to the Supreme Court and throw it the other way to make it a ‘group’ right, and not an individual right, again. And they’d have to fight precedent and stare decis at this point to do so.
Arguing that the 2A applies to a group is passé. Moot. Irrelevant. Ignorant. It’s been almost a year since the decision. When is the news gonna trickle down to internet blog commenters?
It’s like someone arguing with Einsteinian physics with Phlogiston theory of the aether... in 1935. Or arguing disease causes with our side being on the Germ Theory side of the aisle, while the other side is arguing an imbalance of Sanguine or Melancholic Humours causing infection. It’s just not relevant anymore to cite militia requirements as a reason to disarm people.
Ok, ok, it took a while before Arkansas and others realized the court and the feds really meant business after Brown v Board and that separate is unequal. It took a few tries before Gideon v Wainwright progressed to Miranda v Arizona. There is always inertia to overcome. And right now the inertia is on our side, as well as the moral high ground.
~~~
Update: A little serendipity, as it seems Joe Huffman lighted on this in today's post as well.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
Ruger AR
As I suspected. Ruger came out with AR rifle at the NRA convention in Phoenix to add to the plethora of choice in that class of varmint guns.
But, as you may know, the platform in any form doesn't interest me, greatly. It's not high on my 'want' list. Which is odd, for me, as it is the most popular sporting rifle-type in the country. Everyone and their brother has an AR.
Add the disinterest to a $2000 price tag and I am much more likely to get a Mini-14 instead for a third the price.
But this rifle LOOKS decent. I like the piston driven operation versus the stand direct gas impingement. And I REALLY like the Troy fold down sights.
Like I said, it LOOKS decent. And for the money they want it better BE spectacular. I'll withhold my personal opinion on anything but the price when its been put through its paces by all the gun enthusiasts out there.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Speaking of Surplus Ammo
There is a lot of surplus ammo out there. It is generally cheap and plentiful.
Cheap is a good thing.
But what is plentiful and cheap one decade, the next decade... not so much.
Now, and in the 90's old Warsaw Pact rounds are everywhere. Eventually they will run out. And there will be few commercial sources for cheap available for many calibers. 7.62x39 will stay around a while, but 7.62x54R will eventually dry up. Bulgarian 8mm Mauser, too.
6.5 mm Arisaka ammo might have been everywhere in the late 40's, but not now. Same with 6.5 Carcano, if a little longer window. Carcano also had that bad vibe attached to it since November 1963.
US Army .30-06 is long gone now, but in the 50's and 60's? Now, even the Greek stuff still rattling around will go away one day. Same with British .303.
7.62x51... still in use, and my preference... is limited by Clinton era regulations (I'm told) that restricts US Army surplus resale.
Surplus Swiss can't be around forever, but that is some good stuff.
So it's hard to pick a platform and count on ammo type to be their for when you pass on a rifle to the next generation.
Can anyone think of a decent caliber that best bucks this trend for a little bit other than .223, .308, and 7.62x39 (I don't consider this last too 'decent')?
Cheap is a good thing.
But what is plentiful and cheap one decade, the next decade... not so much.
Now, and in the 90's old Warsaw Pact rounds are everywhere. Eventually they will run out. And there will be few commercial sources for cheap available for many calibers. 7.62x39 will stay around a while, but 7.62x54R will eventually dry up. Bulgarian 8mm Mauser, too.
6.5 mm Arisaka ammo might have been everywhere in the late 40's, but not now. Same with 6.5 Carcano, if a little longer window. Carcano also had that bad vibe attached to it since November 1963.
US Army .30-06 is long gone now, but in the 50's and 60's? Now, even the Greek stuff still rattling around will go away one day. Same with British .303.
7.62x51... still in use, and my preference... is limited by Clinton era regulations (I'm told) that restricts US Army surplus resale.
Surplus Swiss can't be around forever, but that is some good stuff.
So it's hard to pick a platform and count on ammo type to be their for when you pass on a rifle to the next generation.
Can anyone think of a decent caliber that best bucks this trend for a little bit other than .223, .308, and 7.62x39 (I don't consider this last too 'decent')?
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Interesting!
Firearm blog had an entry for a new match grade ammo for 7.62x51 rifles.
I don’t cotton to match ammo generally. I don’t shoot well enough as it is, and giving me match ammo is like putting lipstick on a pig. Surplus rifle ammo suits me fine, and is less of a waste of money. I said ‘less.’ There are so many people that it would be a better use of resources if I just gave them my ammo instead of using it up myself in my fumblings.
The other issue with match ammo and me is price differential with the surplus style ‘plinking’ ammo. You don’t lay up 1000 rounds of match ammo for Zombie response unless you are quite wealthy, or good enough to be a sniper. Or Swiss. All their citizen-soldiers use is match ammo, I gather.
I don’t cotton to match ammo generally. I don’t shoot well enough as it is, and giving me match ammo is like putting lipstick on a pig. Surplus rifle ammo suits me fine, and is less of a waste of money. I said ‘less.’ There are so many people that it would be a better use of resources if I just gave them my ammo instead of using it up myself in my fumblings.
The other issue with match ammo and me is price differential with the surplus style ‘plinking’ ammo. You don’t lay up 1000 rounds of match ammo for Zombie response unless you are quite wealthy, or good enough to be a sniper. Or Swiss. All their citizen-soldiers use is match ammo, I gather.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Useless Gun Meme
There is a Meme going around. "Top Five Impractical-But-Cool Firearms." I really can’t participate. I haven’t shot enough variety to know. I’ll leave this meme to people less n00b than I, have shot a lot, or SOLD a lot of different guns.
Tam DID cover a gun I used to have. SPAS. I was taken in my the coolness factor and HAD to have it. Wish I still had it, as I bought mine for $500 and I could sell it for $1000, easy, today.
It really was cool looking. And I really couldn't make heads nor tails on how to operate it. It sort of developed a buying philosophy for me to follow from then on. "Don't buy a weapon that you need a mentor that needs more than 4 minutes to show you basic operation of said weapon."
It took about 30 seconds to show me how to operate and FIELD strip a Garand. I still think I'd need 15 minutes or more for a SPAS 12. And it is heavy, and is bulky.
Tam DID cover a gun I used to have. SPAS. I was taken in my the coolness factor and HAD to have it. Wish I still had it, as I bought mine for $500 and I could sell it for $1000, easy, today.
It really was cool looking. And I really couldn't make heads nor tails on how to operate it. It sort of developed a buying philosophy for me to follow from then on. "Don't buy a weapon that you need a mentor that needs more than 4 minutes to show you basic operation of said weapon."
It took about 30 seconds to show me how to operate and FIELD strip a Garand. I still think I'd need 15 minutes or more for a SPAS 12. And it is heavy, and is bulky.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Padre
I’ve mentioned before that my father is a bit of a hoplophobe. He's just not yet comfortable with the subject.
He seems to think I got a CCW permit from Utah ‘just to have it’.
He doesn’t realize that I now carry wherever I am able. And I would carry to his house the second it is kosher to do so in the Free State, the great state of Maryland.
He is flabbergasted by why I’d NEED to carry a defensive firearm. I brought up the fact that he doesn’t NEED smoke detectors and will probably never need them, but he still checks the batteries twice a year.
I know that's an old trope among readers, but it's still effective. He might not remember the time I got mugged, and how that might not have turned out the way it did. I might have been beaten to death, when my only option against 3 attackers was to charge through them, back to the house I came from, and reinforcements. With the training I have now, and the mindset, I wouldn't have gotten into the situation in the first place. Even if I was armed with a rifle.
I need to take him shooting. I bet he shoots better than me.
He seems to think I got a CCW permit from Utah ‘just to have it’.
He doesn’t realize that I now carry wherever I am able. And I would carry to his house the second it is kosher to do so in the Free State, the great state of Maryland.
He is flabbergasted by why I’d NEED to carry a defensive firearm. I brought up the fact that he doesn’t NEED smoke detectors and will probably never need them, but he still checks the batteries twice a year.
I know that's an old trope among readers, but it's still effective. He might not remember the time I got mugged, and how that might not have turned out the way it did. I might have been beaten to death, when my only option against 3 attackers was to charge through them, back to the house I came from, and reinforcements. With the training I have now, and the mindset, I wouldn't have gotten into the situation in the first place. Even if I was armed with a rifle.
I need to take him shooting. I bet he shoots better than me.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Boy Scouts
My brother is now thinking of taking his son shooting. With me, of course. He’s a teenager. Boy Scout age. So I was thinking using the Boy Scout merit badge requirements and procedures as a starting point.
We’d probably start him out with .22 rifles.
They used to have merit badge books for each merit badge. You’d use that as a guide book under tutelege from some counselor, and that counselor would sign off when you met the requirements to earn the badge.
Sadly, it looks like the merit badge books haven’t been fully digitized yet. The requirements have been.
Most of it seems to be a Hunter’s Safety Class, but a Lite version. With a shooting requirement for score. You can go muzzle loading, air gun, or modern cartridge. And the shooting score for .22 isn’t easy. “Using a .22 caliber rimfire rifle and shooting from a bench rest or supported prone position at 50 feet, fire five groups (three shots per group) that can be covered by a quarter.”
A quarter!
Now do all 15 have to go into a group you can cover with a quarter? I don’t know if I can do that. Now a 3-shot group, even from a bench rest, in an inch hole is by no means simple.
Here’s an interesting requirement:
“h. Explain to your counselor the proper hygienic guidelines used in shooting.”
Uh… refrain from keeping your trigger finger warm between rounds of fire by sticking it up your butt?
Ok, ok, it’s probably has to do with washing your hands of powder residue after shooting. But still… do keep your finger out of your butt.
This requirement can get you a PhD if you took it to the bitter end of detail:
“f. Obtain a copy of the hunting laws for your state. Explain the main points of hunting laws in your state and give any special laws on the use of guns or ammunition.”
Oooo… I don’t remember a shotgun merit badge!
You have to hit 12 of 25 clays on 2 occasions. Probably better than I can do, now.
We’d probably start him out with .22 rifles.
They used to have merit badge books for each merit badge. You’d use that as a guide book under tutelege from some counselor, and that counselor would sign off when you met the requirements to earn the badge.
Sadly, it looks like the merit badge books haven’t been fully digitized yet. The requirements have been.
Most of it seems to be a Hunter’s Safety Class, but a Lite version. With a shooting requirement for score. You can go muzzle loading, air gun, or modern cartridge. And the shooting score for .22 isn’t easy. “Using a .22 caliber rimfire rifle and shooting from a bench rest or supported prone position at 50 feet, fire five groups (three shots per group) that can be covered by a quarter.”
A quarter!
Now do all 15 have to go into a group you can cover with a quarter? I don’t know if I can do that. Now a 3-shot group, even from a bench rest, in an inch hole is by no means simple.
Here’s an interesting requirement:
“h. Explain to your counselor the proper hygienic guidelines used in shooting.”
Uh… refrain from keeping your trigger finger warm between rounds of fire by sticking it up your butt?
Ok, ok, it’s probably has to do with washing your hands of powder residue after shooting. But still… do keep your finger out of your butt.
This requirement can get you a PhD if you took it to the bitter end of detail:
“f. Obtain a copy of the hunting laws for your state. Explain the main points of hunting laws in your state and give any special laws on the use of guns or ammunition.”
Oooo… I don’t remember a shotgun merit badge!
You have to hit 12 of 25 clays on 2 occasions. Probably better than I can do, now.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Real Life Intrudes
I am glad I stopped buying guns. This year.
Looks like gun money may have to go to a new computer. The one I have is showing its age and starting to get the creeping senility. And it's not good when your computer can't remember stuff. You know what this means? Whenever I need to upgrade, but BEFORE I can, a bunch of new must-have computer games come out.
And with a new computer comes a new monitor. And a new digi cam. And that TV isn't getting any younger.
And I've had this mattress since 1991... Lotta memories tied to that mattress. Should I continue?
Looks like gun money may have to go to a new computer. The one I have is showing its age and starting to get the creeping senility. And it's not good when your computer can't remember stuff. You know what this means? Whenever I need to upgrade, but BEFORE I can, a bunch of new must-have computer games come out.
And with a new computer comes a new monitor. And a new digi cam. And that TV isn't getting any younger.
And I've had this mattress since 1991... Lotta memories tied to that mattress. Should I continue?
Monday, May 11, 2009
Garand Manual of Arms.
I found a new wiki, thanks to Hell in a Handbasket.
I did notice THIS quote for the first time under its, and Wikipedia's, M1 Garand rifle entry:
That philosophy would go forward as small units started getting armed with 20-30 round magazines and full auto capability for the ordinary riflemen.
Hollywood would also pick up on it. And full auto is more visually impressive for the movies.
Then individual gunnies would notice the flaws. The tactic falls apart if you don't think about it. The tactic was designed for small unit set piece battles like we saw in WWI and WWII. It's a reaction to the most successful tactic for small unit action for a citizen soldier force. More elite soldiers would be all sneaky and stuff, with shooting to hit, as well as shooting to suppress. Ideally you want your army's riflemen to be as elite as possible so they can use either tactic effectively depending on the circumstances. It's just that shooting and hitting is more difficult to accomplish. The skill is harder to attain.
But when you are all alone at your vacation home in the boonies and the zombies are coming, or a biker gang infected with rabies, or a drug cartel home-invasion, spray and pray won't serve you so well. You have no squad and no mortars to back you up. You have to hit. And not BE hit. Hopefully the bad guys are spray and pray types and will miss a lot.
It has messy code, throwing errors all over the place with some browsers. It's search function not very robust. For example, it can't find m14, but can find M14 Rifle. So the site needs some seasoning. Hopefully it's just having teething troubles.
I have high hopes.
I did notice THIS quote for the first time under its, and Wikipedia's, M1 Garand rifle entry:
In battle, the manual of arms called for the rifle to be fired until empty, and then recharged quickly. Due to the well-developed logistical system of the U.S. military at the time, this wastage of ammunition was generally not critical, though this could change in the case of units that came under intense fire or were flanked or surrounded by enemy forces.Hmmm. Spray and pray with a Garand. I guess that's the start of it. I can see the advantages. You don't want to be caught with only one left in the clip if a human wave attack comes at you. And if EVERYONE in the squad is reloading after firing that one... Things could get bad. In WWII you certainly had a greater volume of fire against the opposition with their bolt-action rifles, so 8 rounds in a quick succession would keep the enemy's head down while another squad or fire team advances or artillery is called in on the bad guys. Shoot and manuever. Or hold and paste.
That philosophy would go forward as small units started getting armed with 20-30 round magazines and full auto capability for the ordinary riflemen.
Hollywood would also pick up on it. And full auto is more visually impressive for the movies.
Then individual gunnies would notice the flaws. The tactic falls apart if you don't think about it. The tactic was designed for small unit set piece battles like we saw in WWI and WWII. It's a reaction to the most successful tactic for small unit action for a citizen soldier force. More elite soldiers would be all sneaky and stuff, with shooting to hit, as well as shooting to suppress. Ideally you want your army's riflemen to be as elite as possible so they can use either tactic effectively depending on the circumstances. It's just that shooting and hitting is more difficult to accomplish. The skill is harder to attain.
But when you are all alone at your vacation home in the boonies and the zombies are coming, or a biker gang infected with rabies, or a drug cartel home-invasion, spray and pray won't serve you so well. You have no squad and no mortars to back you up. You have to hit. And not BE hit. Hopefully the bad guys are spray and pray types and will miss a lot.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Trollop The Gun Nut
She went shooting solo again.
She's growing beyond my control. At this rate she will BUILD her own AR before I even get a rifle that shoots .223.
Only one hangup there. She left the key to her trigger lock AT the range. Fortunately, the range folks found it. She coulda swore she stuffed it in the range bag.
Yes, she has a range bag. It's got Andy Warhol prints on it. Or guns. Functional and Stylish.
She's growing beyond my control. At this rate she will BUILD her own AR before I even get a rifle that shoots .223.
Only one hangup there. She left the key to her trigger lock AT the range. Fortunately, the range folks found it. She coulda swore she stuffed it in the range bag.
Yes, she has a range bag. It's got Andy Warhol prints on it. Or guns. Functional and Stylish.
Here is her target. Holding at 6 o'clock now and getting the ones she concentrates on right on the bullseye. She shoots better than me with the 1911.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Friday, May 8, 2009
Ammo Shortage
I can’t buy ammo online. I live in Montgomery County Maryland, and this one county won’t permit ammunition shipping to private residences. I can use MBtGE for a mail drop, but that’s not convenient. I have to coordinate through him, pay him in cash rather than an online credit card, and then pick it all up when it arrives, and he lives over an hour away. (If there is traffic in Northern Virginia it takes 4 hours. And there is a traffic in Northern Virginia… ALL the TIME!) On rare occasions when I can scrap $500 together I go that route. Not lately, as the online ammo suppliers are all back ordered, it seems.
No, I sort of took a page from Kim Du Toit. Every time I visited the gun store I’d buy boxes in onsey twosey. It hurts the wallet less that way. Or seems to. Over time it is more expensive, sure, but if I waited for a deal I’d have none. It's slightly more expensive, too, at the gun store, but it helps HIM pay the rent so he will be in neighborhood longer. And he is never out of ammo.
A coupla three boxes a month for a couple years adds up. So I have a halfway decent supply. So that sets up the “never dip below this level” emergency store. A floor I do not dip below. I can rotate out old stuff from this cache to keep it fresh, but I am not too worried about that. This is the stock for Zombie Apocalypse. Aka the Zombacalypse
And I accumulated the majority of all this before the recent unpleasantness. All in ammo cans, out of sight and out of mind, and in a stable, cool, dry place. Plenty of my primary calibers.
So that is one category of ammo. “Storage Ammo.” There are two others: “Training Ammo” and “Blasting Ammo.”
When I contemplate a future training course, like Defensive Pistol (hop to take this summer), I will start to squirrel away ammo to use there. Since a course like that asks you to bring 300 rounds, minimum, I need to lay up 500 or so in the appropriate caliber. A big weeklong course like Gunsite asks for 1000 or 1500. Phew. If no specific training course is contemplated for the coming year, this segregated storage area of Training Ammo can whittle down to nothing.
Blasting ammo is just the pile I can freely grab from on a range day. When there was no shortage, and I could just pop into a place like Wal Mart and get anything needed right before a trip, this pile of ammo was pretty thin. Not now. Now it has to be horded and built up. But I have plenty. I don’t account for amounts because this ammo goes downrange so quickly. It merely a judgment of “that’s a big pile, I should go shooting” and/or “that’s a small pile, I better hunt up some more.”
If I get into shooting competitions I will need yet another pile. A “IDPA Ammo” pile. This pile will have a serious burn rate, so I am reluctant for that reason alone.
Oddly, the one caliber I don’t have a lot of in permanent storage is the newest one. The .40 for my SIG P229 DAK SAS. (MAN that is a mouthful…) I am also not contemplating laying in a lot. I am not sure why. Sure ammo is scarce, but I could slowly build up. Sure, that’s my primary blasting and training gun right now so the burn through is severe. And it’s the go-to CCW piece on the rare times I am in Virginia and can, but that’s self-defense ammo, not full metal jacket. So why no stores? Dunno. One thing is, I have plenty of ammo cans and don’t need to clutter up the closets with another. Another is that the 1911 would be emergency gun and the revolver it’s backup. If I had to bug out I’d take them in the truck. Another big ammo can for another pistol is taking up valuable Bug Out Truck space and weight. The .40 is sort of a tertiary gun in that case. Like the .380 Colt. I don’t have much ammo for THAT one either, as a matter of fact. I guess I’d have to leave it behind if I had to flee for the Free-Zone in Michigan and get out from behind enemy lines. You know, in case Venezuela and Cuba pull a Red Dawn scenario and invade CONUS.
Wolverines!
No, I sort of took a page from Kim Du Toit. Every time I visited the gun store I’d buy boxes in onsey twosey. It hurts the wallet less that way. Or seems to. Over time it is more expensive, sure, but if I waited for a deal I’d have none. It's slightly more expensive, too, at the gun store, but it helps HIM pay the rent so he will be in neighborhood longer. And he is never out of ammo.
A coupla three boxes a month for a couple years adds up. So I have a halfway decent supply. So that sets up the “never dip below this level” emergency store. A floor I do not dip below. I can rotate out old stuff from this cache to keep it fresh, but I am not too worried about that. This is the stock for Zombie Apocalypse. Aka the Zombacalypse
And I accumulated the majority of all this before the recent unpleasantness. All in ammo cans, out of sight and out of mind, and in a stable, cool, dry place. Plenty of my primary calibers.
So that is one category of ammo. “Storage Ammo.” There are two others: “Training Ammo” and “Blasting Ammo.”
When I contemplate a future training course, like Defensive Pistol (hop to take this summer), I will start to squirrel away ammo to use there. Since a course like that asks you to bring 300 rounds, minimum, I need to lay up 500 or so in the appropriate caliber. A big weeklong course like Gunsite asks for 1000 or 1500. Phew. If no specific training course is contemplated for the coming year, this segregated storage area of Training Ammo can whittle down to nothing.
Blasting ammo is just the pile I can freely grab from on a range day. When there was no shortage, and I could just pop into a place like Wal Mart and get anything needed right before a trip, this pile of ammo was pretty thin. Not now. Now it has to be horded and built up. But I have plenty. I don’t account for amounts because this ammo goes downrange so quickly. It merely a judgment of “that’s a big pile, I should go shooting” and/or “that’s a small pile, I better hunt up some more.”
If I get into shooting competitions I will need yet another pile. A “IDPA Ammo” pile. This pile will have a serious burn rate, so I am reluctant for that reason alone.
Oddly, the one caliber I don’t have a lot of in permanent storage is the newest one. The .40 for my SIG P229 DAK SAS. (MAN that is a mouthful…) I am also not contemplating laying in a lot. I am not sure why. Sure ammo is scarce, but I could slowly build up. Sure, that’s my primary blasting and training gun right now so the burn through is severe. And it’s the go-to CCW piece on the rare times I am in Virginia and can, but that’s self-defense ammo, not full metal jacket. So why no stores? Dunno. One thing is, I have plenty of ammo cans and don’t need to clutter up the closets with another. Another is that the 1911 would be emergency gun and the revolver it’s backup. If I had to bug out I’d take them in the truck. Another big ammo can for another pistol is taking up valuable Bug Out Truck space and weight. The .40 is sort of a tertiary gun in that case. Like the .380 Colt. I don’t have much ammo for THAT one either, as a matter of fact. I guess I’d have to leave it behind if I had to flee for the Free-Zone in Michigan and get out from behind enemy lines. You know, in case Venezuela and Cuba pull a Red Dawn scenario and invade CONUS.
Wolverines!
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Customize
So I told you about a work buddy that got an XD a coupla months ago.
He has been bitten by the customization bug, and hard.
I didn't encourage it. One of the thing I'd like about an XD acquisition (for me) is that it works well right out of the box, and its not too expensive. All you have to buy for it is gun cleaner and bullets. And many don't mess around with too much gun cleaner.
And he shoots it just fine.
But he bought after market rubber grips to change the way it feels in his hand.
He bought sight paint to change the color of the 3-dot sights, and I'll bet he send away for tritium sights or heine sights within a year.
He is going to polish the barrel. "Why? Has it ever jammed on you?" "No, but..."
And he got a tungsten guide rod to weigh it down. On purpose.
He is thinking a flash light for the underrail, soon, too.
I know the feeling. I 'customized' my Springfield 1911 a bit. A few different grip types (an indulgence), mainspring housing shape and lock, recoil spring plug. That's it. I was trying to make it more like JWB (pbuh) intended in function. It's not so much a tweak.
I still don't know why the work buddy would mess with an XD, but, more power to him, if it makes him feel better. I did warn him against going at it with a dremel, even for polishing. That little rotary tool has ruined more guns in the last 20 years... If he ruins it, he'll have a lesson learned and a need for a replacement barrel. Such is life.
He has been bitten by the customization bug, and hard.
I didn't encourage it. One of the thing I'd like about an XD acquisition (for me) is that it works well right out of the box, and its not too expensive. All you have to buy for it is gun cleaner and bullets. And many don't mess around with too much gun cleaner.
And he shoots it just fine.
But he bought after market rubber grips to change the way it feels in his hand.
He bought sight paint to change the color of the 3-dot sights, and I'll bet he send away for tritium sights or heine sights within a year.
He is going to polish the barrel. "Why? Has it ever jammed on you?" "No, but..."
And he got a tungsten guide rod to weigh it down. On purpose.
He is thinking a flash light for the underrail, soon, too.
I know the feeling. I 'customized' my Springfield 1911 a bit. A few different grip types (an indulgence), mainspring housing shape and lock, recoil spring plug. That's it. I was trying to make it more like JWB (pbuh) intended in function. It's not so much a tweak.
I still don't know why the work buddy would mess with an XD, but, more power to him, if it makes him feel better. I did warn him against going at it with a dremel, even for polishing. That little rotary tool has ruined more guns in the last 20 years... If he ruins it, he'll have a lesson learned and a need for a replacement barrel. Such is life.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Safety Nomenclature
I was reading Jeff Cooper's recommendation on pistol selection a few weeks back. I believe he said something to the effect of, "Better to have a trigger disconnect pistol safety than a firing pin block." Or maybe he said 'hammer block'. I'd have to find it again, to be exact.
The thing is, I can't find any explanation to what the difference is.
I guess I'll ask at the gun store the next time I go there, if I can remember.
My guess is, the trigger disconnect means that if you pull the trigger, nothing happens. But the firing pin block, if you pull the trigger you get a click as the hammer falls, but the firing pin doesn't/can't strike the primer of the chambered round.
Sometimes there are both. I think the latest do up (Like from 1970? 1980?) of Colt 1911s doesn this.
My pump action .22 rifle is a firing pin block safety. You can pull the trigger, the hammer falls ~click~, and if the safety is engaged nothing should happen.
And I bet Jeff Cooper had an even better reason/s to pick the first style over the second that I hope some reader would enlighten me with. Maybe the second style has inherent mechanical flaws that make it more prone to other failures. I don't know, but I would like to. And google hasn't been so helpful. Wikipedia has something that helps with the hammer/pin block, but not the trigger or sear disconnect.
I also know that many of the upgrades of the 1911 models (Series 80?) after WWII had something to do with the way the safety works and what happens when the pistol is dropped, but I don't know the differences there either. I am working on correcting that. I probably knew all this once, but the lesson didn't stick. I am a slow head.
There is even a chance, in my inexpert fumblings for info, that I have Cooper's preference BACKWARDS. How embarrassing, if true. Please correct my if I messed that up.
Here IS a direct quote from Cooper, but about rifles:
Sounds like he means BOTH types of safeties, there, in one package...
Just wait until I try to figure out the types of S&W revolver types. "5 screw vs. 3 screw," etc. And why you want one over another. It's worse than Stanley wood planes. "What you got there is a type 13a Stanley #7 with a corrugated bottom. There are 3 patent dates and a Sweethart Iron. Depression era. A very good model... All the bells and whistles, and quality had yet to taper off at the factory..."
I haven't dove into the gun minutiae like I did with antique woodworking tools.
The thing is, I can't find any explanation to what the difference is.
I guess I'll ask at the gun store the next time I go there, if I can remember.
My guess is, the trigger disconnect means that if you pull the trigger, nothing happens. But the firing pin block, if you pull the trigger you get a click as the hammer falls, but the firing pin doesn't/can't strike the primer of the chambered round.
Sometimes there are both. I think the latest do up (Like from 1970? 1980?) of Colt 1911s doesn this.
I can understand why you'd want the first and not the second. If you hear a click when you expect a bang you have a problem you have to diagnose. It could be you left the safety on, or it could be a lot of other things might be amiss. It could be unloaded/empty with the slide forward, no round in the chamber, a dud round, a broken firing pin, and other possibilities other than simply an engaged safety.
Better to know why it isn't working, and if there is no click when you pull the trigger and you have a trigger-disconnect safety you have fewer things you need to consider. The hammer is already down on your 1911, or the safety is engaged.My pump action .22 rifle is a firing pin block safety. You can pull the trigger, the hammer falls ~click~, and if the safety is engaged nothing should happen.
And I bet Jeff Cooper had an even better reason/s to pick the first style over the second that I hope some reader would enlighten me with. Maybe the second style has inherent mechanical flaws that make it more prone to other failures. I don't know, but I would like to. And google hasn't been so helpful. Wikipedia has something that helps with the hammer/pin block, but not the trigger or sear disconnect.
I also know that many of the upgrades of the 1911 models (Series 80?) after WWII had something to do with the way the safety works and what happens when the pistol is dropped, but I don't know the differences there either. I am working on correcting that. I probably knew all this once, but the lesson didn't stick. I am a slow head.
There is even a chance, in my inexpert fumblings for info, that I have Cooper's preference BACKWARDS. How embarrassing, if true. Please correct my if I messed that up.
Here IS a direct quote from Cooper, but about rifles:
While I have certain reservations (along with my good friend and mentor Ian McFarlane of Okavango) about mechanical safety latches, it would be impossible to sell a rifle that did not include one. It should be operable with either hand. It should not extrude from the rifle to catch on things (as is the case with the Winchester three-position safety.) And it should disconnect the trigger and sear from the striker, while at the same time positively locking the striker. (People who count upon a safety latch to render a firearm inoperable are living in a dream world.)
Sounds like he means BOTH types of safeties, there, in one package...
Just wait until I try to figure out the types of S&W revolver types. "5 screw vs. 3 screw," etc. And why you want one over another. It's worse than Stanley wood planes. "What you got there is a type 13a Stanley #7 with a corrugated bottom. There are 3 patent dates and a Sweethart Iron. Depression era. A very good model... All the bells and whistles, and quality had yet to taper off at the factory..."
I haven't dove into the gun minutiae like I did with antique woodworking tools.
photo by Luigi Zansi
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Breda's Book
Breda reviews a children’s book at her library.
Synopsis. The People have the right to bear arms. Firearms are there for self defense. A situtation arises where a minor is home alone when a burglar breaks in. Said child calls 911 and the cops arrive before anything bad happens.
In 1987's context, it is quite positive. It was still very much the attitude of the time that, "Let the cops do their job, don't take the law into your own hands." Also, the Brady Campaign types were resurgent and would continue to be for a few more years. The fact that ANY children’s book came out with a positive spin on the 2nd is amazing.
20 years later, that canard that you should just rely on the police to protect you has gone by the wayside. People with half a brain and common sense are coming to that realization now. The idea that the police, despite that “to protect and to serve” written on the squad cars, physically CANNOT be everywhere at once even at their most diligent and efficient and benign posture. People are responsible for their own defense, and police are a backup if you are lucky.
So that’s progress.
Why the progress? People saw the efficacy (lack thereof) of gun control bills and rejected them as ineffective at best. The majority of folks view that ‘reasonable’ gun control was gone beyond reasonable some time ago, and new legislation since has tipped toward just people control, vis criminal control. What the People think of as ‘reasonable’ doesn’t in any way jibe with what the Democrat party thinks, now. A Supreme Court decision for Heller gelled people’s ideas, and it came down on the Human Rights side rather than the Control side. And when positive defense rights legislation, like conceal-carry, came down the pike, the dire warnings of Dodge City shootouts didn’t come to pass. At worst conceal-carry caused no change in crime. (There is correlation with a drop in crime in places, not necessarily CAUSED by conceal carry, but… No matter, it cause no harm and it’s an expansion of freedom.)
If this children’s book was written today, it would not be the same. The debate has changed since 1987. Changed in our favor.
There is some grumblings that the child in the book had to dial 911 instead of dialing 911 AND arming themselves. I am of 2 minds about this. There are laws restricting children’s access to guns, so that option is mostly off the table. Do I want a child making life or death decisions? Maybe a child has the maturity level to handle a prowler, and be armed. That would have to be determined case by case, judged by the parents. I already am wary of the parents judgment in this story with them leaving the child home alone, so I doubt the parents properly trained the child for nighttime house-clearing Ops.
The problem isn’t that the law would frown on the child defending itself with a firearm (not a good idea), and the problem isn’t that calling 911, only, is the right thing to do (relying on that slender thread for salvation is also not a good idea.) The problem is, why did the parents fail in their responsibility to protect their child? Clearly the child wasn’t mature enough to handle the full spectrum response implied. Perhaps most children are not.
And a children’s book that counseled youthful armed response… imagine the hysterics THAT would cause? You’d get less outcry putting hardcore pr0n in the kid’s section.
Naturally, I developed all this rambling without having read the book. I was relying on a trusted reviewer. That's ok. This is a blog post, not my PhD dissertation. I don't need that much due diligence to pull an opinion out of my butt.
Synopsis. The People have the right to bear arms. Firearms are there for self defense. A situtation arises where a minor is home alone when a burglar breaks in. Said child calls 911 and the cops arrive before anything bad happens.
In 1987's context, it is quite positive. It was still very much the attitude of the time that, "Let the cops do their job, don't take the law into your own hands." Also, the Brady Campaign types were resurgent and would continue to be for a few more years. The fact that ANY children’s book came out with a positive spin on the 2nd is amazing.
20 years later, that canard that you should just rely on the police to protect you has gone by the wayside. People with half a brain and common sense are coming to that realization now. The idea that the police, despite that “to protect and to serve” written on the squad cars, physically CANNOT be everywhere at once even at their most diligent and efficient and benign posture. People are responsible for their own defense, and police are a backup if you are lucky.
So that’s progress.
Why the progress? People saw the efficacy (lack thereof) of gun control bills and rejected them as ineffective at best. The majority of folks view that ‘reasonable’ gun control was gone beyond reasonable some time ago, and new legislation since has tipped toward just people control, vis criminal control. What the People think of as ‘reasonable’ doesn’t in any way jibe with what the Democrat party thinks, now. A Supreme Court decision for Heller gelled people’s ideas, and it came down on the Human Rights side rather than the Control side. And when positive defense rights legislation, like conceal-carry, came down the pike, the dire warnings of Dodge City shootouts didn’t come to pass. At worst conceal-carry caused no change in crime. (There is correlation with a drop in crime in places, not necessarily CAUSED by conceal carry, but… No matter, it cause no harm and it’s an expansion of freedom.)
If this children’s book was written today, it would not be the same. The debate has changed since 1987. Changed in our favor.
There is some grumblings that the child in the book had to dial 911 instead of dialing 911 AND arming themselves. I am of 2 minds about this. There are laws restricting children’s access to guns, so that option is mostly off the table. Do I want a child making life or death decisions? Maybe a child has the maturity level to handle a prowler, and be armed. That would have to be determined case by case, judged by the parents. I already am wary of the parents judgment in this story with them leaving the child home alone, so I doubt the parents properly trained the child for nighttime house-clearing Ops.
The problem isn’t that the law would frown on the child defending itself with a firearm (not a good idea), and the problem isn’t that calling 911, only, is the right thing to do (relying on that slender thread for salvation is also not a good idea.) The problem is, why did the parents fail in their responsibility to protect their child? Clearly the child wasn’t mature enough to handle the full spectrum response implied. Perhaps most children are not.
And a children’s book that counseled youthful armed response… imagine the hysterics THAT would cause? You’d get less outcry putting hardcore pr0n in the kid’s section.
Naturally, I developed all this rambling without having read the book. I was relying on a trusted reviewer. That's ok. This is a blog post, not my PhD dissertation. I don't need that much due diligence to pull an opinion out of my butt.
Monday, May 4, 2009
So Proud
I truly am. Proud.
Saucy Trollop went to the range with me on Sunday to test out her new XD40 purchase. Her accuracy improved when she stopped listening to me about her grip and just listened to me about trigger squeeze.
Well, on Tuesday she went to the range. Alone. By herself. Solo. She didn’t even tell me about it. WONDERFUL.
She says she shot well. So I need photographic evidence to share with you readers. All both of you.
And she ran into problems.
First, she is short. Altitudinally challenged. She cannot reach the little clip to attach her targets to. Luckily, range folk tend to be polite, helpful folk. Plus she’s a girl. She was able to secure assistance with that, no problem. (Short men could get the same assistance, but that would require they ask for help. Trollop asked, too.)
She had never operated the switch to send the target downrange, so the range officer had to demonstrate that. Once you do that once, you know how to do it forever, so that issue is resolved.
The range has a minimum distance you must push the targets out to. It’s the house rules. She wasn’t familiar with that. Again, the nice range officer told her to send the target out to the line on the floor, and everyone was happy.
Her final issue was a malf. Her first. She got a click when she expected a bang. She notices the chamber indicator was down and concluded that she had a FTF. Failure to feed. She did the malf drill, Tap-Rack-Bang, but still nothing. Chamber indicator still down. So she asked for help. The range officer gave it a good rack and it fed. No further problems.
Now, not being there, I have to guess. I am guessing she limp-wristed the grip and that’s why it failed to chamber a round. As for correction of the malfunction, I am guessing that she didn’t rack the slide back far enough to strip off the next round. So, two easy things to work on. One: grip a little firmer to avoid the limp-wristing effect. The spring in an XD is pretty stout and it needs a stable grip to work the action properly. Also, that stout spring makes it harder to rack, to correct the problem. I know she can get the slide locked back when she wants to. We/she will dry ‘fire’ practice more to get her used to pulling the slide ALL the way back. Alternatively, if it happens again, she can take the magazine out, take her time locking the slide back, and the load and fire like usual. Easy peasey.
She’s becoming a gun enthusiast. Today is her payday. This is where she starts putting a few $20s into a stash for her Colt Anaconda…
Did I mention how proud I was?
Here is her target. Shot at the top 2. 25 feet. Very good.
Saucy Trollop went to the range with me on Sunday to test out her new XD40 purchase. Her accuracy improved when she stopped listening to me about her grip and just listened to me about trigger squeeze.
Well, on Tuesday she went to the range. Alone. By herself. Solo. She didn’t even tell me about it. WONDERFUL.
She says she shot well. So I need photographic evidence to share with you readers. All both of you.
And she ran into problems.
First, she is short. Altitudinally challenged. She cannot reach the little clip to attach her targets to. Luckily, range folk tend to be polite, helpful folk. Plus she’s a girl. She was able to secure assistance with that, no problem. (Short men could get the same assistance, but that would require they ask for help. Trollop asked, too.)
She had never operated the switch to send the target downrange, so the range officer had to demonstrate that. Once you do that once, you know how to do it forever, so that issue is resolved.
The range has a minimum distance you must push the targets out to. It’s the house rules. She wasn’t familiar with that. Again, the nice range officer told her to send the target out to the line on the floor, and everyone was happy.
Her final issue was a malf. Her first. She got a click when she expected a bang. She notices the chamber indicator was down and concluded that she had a FTF. Failure to feed. She did the malf drill, Tap-Rack-Bang, but still nothing. Chamber indicator still down. So she asked for help. The range officer gave it a good rack and it fed. No further problems.
Now, not being there, I have to guess. I am guessing she limp-wristed the grip and that’s why it failed to chamber a round. As for correction of the malfunction, I am guessing that she didn’t rack the slide back far enough to strip off the next round. So, two easy things to work on. One: grip a little firmer to avoid the limp-wristing effect. The spring in an XD is pretty stout and it needs a stable grip to work the action properly. Also, that stout spring makes it harder to rack, to correct the problem. I know she can get the slide locked back when she wants to. We/she will dry ‘fire’ practice more to get her used to pulling the slide ALL the way back. Alternatively, if it happens again, she can take the magazine out, take her time locking the slide back, and the load and fire like usual. Easy peasey.
She’s becoming a gun enthusiast. Today is her payday. This is where she starts putting a few $20s into a stash for her Colt Anaconda…
Did I mention how proud I was?
Here is her target. Shot at the top 2. 25 feet. Very good.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Swine Flu
It's not Swine Flu.
It's Zombies.
Remember how the President said he was cutting $100 million out of the budget? It was more like $300 million and he took it out of the operating budget of RoMERO, so we weren't able to contain the initial outbreak in Mexico this time.
"What do we need money to combat Zombies for? When W and Cheney briefed me on this in January they were just pulling my leg," he said.
He changed his tune when they showed him an actual zombie.
Well the money taps are back on line, but still not up to snuff. I haven't been deployed with my unit, for example. Which is ok because a bank official and a whole high school within walking distance from my house had an 'event.' It doesn't cost much to drive somewhere compared to jumping on a C-130.
Ad hoc teams are being cobbled together, and retirees have been re-activated. The RoMERO organization is so hush hush that a neighbor that is a WWII vet, turns out, is one of these retirees. I had no idea of his past record, and he didn't know I was currently in the.
Anyway, we are ride sharing. Me, still doing system admin stuff, and he was motor pool and small boat maintenance back in the day. His weapon specialty, back in the day, was long bow. Yes, archery. Very discreet because of the noise, and fewer people get excited with they see a bow compared to a rifle or pistol. But he's 80 now and doesn't have the arm strength he once had, so he has had to step down to a light compound boy and the occasional crossbow. He's so old school he was issued a revolver. I'm guessing S&W model 10.
I bet he has great stories.
Hopefully I'll be able to share details soon. That Rockville High School thing was pretty ugly. I've been pretty busy. NOW you know why I encouraged Trollop to get a pistol... Hate to have a shamblor crawl in through her doggie door. (Did that sound dirty?)
Try to remain calm. 'Timahflu' is actually a code name for cyanide capsules, so be sure you only take the Tamaflu.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Primer Age
There is some debate in the gun world about primer shelf life, from time to time. I was reminded by a comment here, and that's the latest reference, but I have seen the talk bandied about in much less reasonable terms previously elsewhere.
The following is true, the internet tells me so:
“Old style corrosive primers last forever if you keep the cartridges in a stable environment. Cool and dry. Modern primers can go bad in 30 years or so, but you can seal and bury the old, WWII era stuff for 100 years, no problem when your grandkids dig em up. Loose primers kept by reloaders go bad even faster than assembler-in-cartridge primers. So you MUST use loose primers within 2 years, and all factory ammo in 20 years. Older stuff will fail. Not every time, but enough.”
Now I have shot a bunch of 1970’s stuff. It’s the bargain table at my gun store. All stuff, probably from the dealer’s garage, that was made back in the days I wore knee pants and Dad wore bell-bottom jeans. I have never had a problem with a squib or dud with older ammo. Not that squibs don’t happen. I am not a big enough consumer of ammunition to even be a statistical blip on real world ammo/primer failure. But the warnings by internet authorities about 30 year old ammo going bad seems to infer if I had 40 year old ammo I’d be lucky if 1 or 2 out of a box of 50 would go off at all. And I don’t think that that is the case.
But if someone wants to give me 100,000 rounds of 1960 US Army surplus 7.62x51mm to test for duds I’d be happy to help out. Heck, I’d settle for 15,000. That’s a big enough statistical sample.
I believe the US military switched to non-corrosive in the early 50’s. So you should not run into much domestic .308 or .223 with corrosive primers.
But back to the topic what is the REAL data on primer failure due to age? The TRUE truth. The skinny. Will 2 per 100 fail on 30 year old basement-stored stuff? 10 per 100? A number less than 1 per 100? My gut says it’s this last, low, number. Brand new stuff will have .08 duds per 100, and in 30 years that number will go up to .21 per 100. Or something. Not too much for me to worry about beyond this one blog entry, doncha think? If my suspicions are actually the case.
I can see unloaded primers getting oxidized much faster than loaded ones, yes.
The following is true, the internet tells me so:
“Old style corrosive primers last forever if you keep the cartridges in a stable environment. Cool and dry. Modern primers can go bad in 30 years or so, but you can seal and bury the old, WWII era stuff for 100 years, no problem when your grandkids dig em up. Loose primers kept by reloaders go bad even faster than assembler-in-cartridge primers. So you MUST use loose primers within 2 years, and all factory ammo in 20 years. Older stuff will fail. Not every time, but enough.”
Now I have shot a bunch of 1970’s stuff. It’s the bargain table at my gun store. All stuff, probably from the dealer’s garage, that was made back in the days I wore knee pants and Dad wore bell-bottom jeans. I have never had a problem with a squib or dud with older ammo. Not that squibs don’t happen. I am not a big enough consumer of ammunition to even be a statistical blip on real world ammo/primer failure. But the warnings by internet authorities about 30 year old ammo going bad seems to infer if I had 40 year old ammo I’d be lucky if 1 or 2 out of a box of 50 would go off at all. And I don’t think that that is the case.
But if someone wants to give me 100,000 rounds of 1960 US Army surplus 7.62x51mm to test for duds I’d be happy to help out. Heck, I’d settle for 15,000. That’s a big enough statistical sample.
I believe the US military switched to non-corrosive in the early 50’s. So you should not run into much domestic .308 or .223 with corrosive primers.
But back to the topic what is the REAL data on primer failure due to age? The TRUE truth. The skinny. Will 2 per 100 fail on 30 year old basement-stored stuff? 10 per 100? A number less than 1 per 100? My gut says it’s this last, low, number. Brand new stuff will have .08 duds per 100, and in 30 years that number will go up to .21 per 100. Or something. Not too much for me to worry about beyond this one blog entry, doncha think? If my suspicions are actually the case.
I can see unloaded primers getting oxidized much faster than loaded ones, yes.
Friday, May 1, 2009
One Day...
One day I'm gonna get a Ruger 10/22.
When that day comes I am going to use a military style sling, like on my M1A (it'll need swivels), buy a bunch of magazines for it and outfit it with a peep hole sight like those from Tech-Sight:
Why? So I can kinda-sorta practice shooting a platform similar to my main rifle, but with ammo that $20 get's me 500 shots instead of 20.
Of course this similarity thing goes all out the window if I mount an EOTech holographic sight on the M1A. I guess in that case I better get the 10/22 peep sight AND cheaper red-dot scope of some kind, too.
versus:
~~~~
One other thing that would make my 10/22 expensive, maybe, iffn....
A suppressor. Go plink without ear protection.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
