The “new” Gen5 9mm Glock 47 pistol has actually been around for a few years now. In 2019, Glock Inc. was originally awarded a huge contract to replace the US Border Patrol’s .40 S&W HK P2000s both with an entire line up of Gen5 9mm Glock pistols: the Glock 19 Gen5 MOSs, Glock 26 Gen5s, and the Glock 47. The Glock 47 is now seeing its full commercial release right after being publicly announced during the recent 2023 SHOT Show.
By all means, the “new” Glock 47 which will be replacing the Glock 17 Gen5 from here on out is basically identical to the 17 in terms of size, weight, and handling. Glock 47 pistols ship with MOS optics-ready slides by default. The main difference between the Glock 47 and the venerable Glock 17 however lies in the fact that the Glock 47 shares the same full-size frame with the Glock 45 pistol. (This means that the Glock 47 in turn is compatible with the fifth generation Glock 19 slide).
Gen5 + 4 Different Configurations From Two Base Guns
To clarify, Glock 17 frame and slides are not compatible with anything other than themselves. But anyone who purchases a new Glock 47 and already owns a Gen5 Glock 19 can mix and match those slides. Their Glock 47 slide will work with the Gen5 Glock 19 to make a “longslide Glock 19.” Furthermore, if they don’t own a Glock 45, they can basically assemble their own “commander sized 19-X” Glock with their Glock 47 frame and Glock 19 slide. The interchangeability of these frames and slides basically means that someone who owns both a Gen5 Glock 19 and a Glock 47 has the chance to configure four different pistols from both of those frames and slides. [1. Glock 47; 2. Glock 19; 3. Glock “19X” or “45”; 4. “Glock 19 Longslide.”] To make it easy to understand, it’s no different than the Glock 43X and the Glock 48: both pistols share the same frame and recoil assembly, but the Glock 48 obviously has a longer barrel and slide. In the same way, the Glock 19 Gen5 shares the same recoil assembly with the Glock 47.
The Glock 47 (MOS) field stripped at a local blue-label gun distributor. (This company sells A LOT of Glocks to police departments through all of its stores).
Personally, I am a huge fan of the fifth-generation Glock 17 and I’ll be sad to see it “retired” but it makes sense why Glock would simplify their processes and reduce the number of basic frames.
Frequently we hear these expressions as they pertain to defensive encounters (typically shootings). The idea being that you only have who/what is with you to solve the problem, and by the time the “cavalry” arrives, the situation will likely have been resolved one way or another.
But here’s the thing nobody’s talking about: These sentiments are equally applicable to online discourse as well.
Social media is awash with concealed carry & self defense groups of every possible flavor, with various degrees of expertise.
The best among them, like The PHLster Concealment Workshop, Combatives Association, or Primary & Secondary, are aggressively curated and opinions need to be backed up with experience (either practical or academic).
The vast majority, unfortunately, consist of people with an internet connection and an opinion without a lot of substantiating background. Many recommendations boil down to little more than desperate attempts to feel relevant. “This is my favorite thing, so it should be your favorite thing too, despite the fact that I lack sufficient context or expertise to offer useful feedback”.
At best, these types of situations can result in unnecessarily extending a learning curve, or maybe wasting some money.
At worst they can result in life-altering negative outcomes.
Most recently, in one of these groups, the topic came up of someone talking about carrying at a job that discourages carry.
If you’re familiar with my background you know this topic is deeply personal.
Many of the responses were well intentioned, but not exactly appropriate. Lots of folks talking about carrying full-sized duty guns with a dot and a light at a wedding, or some other social function for a few hours. That’s a far cry from working in close proximity with the same group of people 8-10 hours a day for years at a time for a couple of reasons:
1) It’s a short, one-time event vs. daily routine. There’s just more hours to possibly “get it wrong”
1a) At work other people involved generally have a better sense of who you are as a person, your habits, mannerisms, etc. They’re more likely to spot “tells” than a stranger you just met.
2) Speaking of “getting it wrong” the consequences are generally far more severe for being discovered at work vs. at a social function.
There were, as you’d expect, a smattering of comments about how people are oblivious/don’t notice, etc, which I think is a very dangerous sentiment, and probably warrants its own article.
The thing that really didn’t sit well with me though was how cavalier people were with advice that had the potential to destroy someone’s professional and financial wellbeing. Too many people were confusing “I got lucky” with “My concealment is really that good”.
Some people have high level concealment because they exist in high consequence environments.
Some people haven’t suffered a negative outcome yet simply due to a combination of luck and environmental apathy.
It’s important to understand where they’re coming from, and how seriously they take the consequences/fallout.
Nobody’s going to cut you a check or serve your sentence for you if the advice is bad, wrong, or poorly thought out.
THAT is what I mean by “you’re on your own”.
Be very cautious about who you take advice from, because they won’t have to suffer the consequences of being wrong.
The Colt Model 6700/AR-15A4, a civilian legal semi-auto only version of the M-16A4. This particular rifle is paired with the excellent Steiner M8Xi Dual-Plane 1-8x LPVO with the Plumb Reticle.
The M-16A4, the last of the full-size 20-inch M-16 5.56mm NATO M-16 variants and the one synonymous with the GWOT (The Global War On Terror) is starting to show up in the current Ukraine-Russia conflict. Honestly, it is not surprising to see a proper western rifle showing up on the front lines in Ukraine considering the plethora of military aid Ukraine has been receiving since the start of the conflict nearly a year ago.
The Armourer’s Bench has a short video with some photos that showcase the M-16A4 in the hands of the relatively new Ukrainian 47th Brigade.Notice their mention of another purely “Western” rifle, the classic 5.56mm FN FNC, the little brother to the FN FAL.
The Mattel Rifle
The AR-15 family of weapons including the M-16 rifle is soon approaching its 60th year since its original debut. At that time, the design and material used in its implementation were a radical shift from that which gunmakers commonly used. Wood and steel were replaced with modern plastics and aircraft grade aluminum (leaving steel only for the most critical stress bearing parts of the rifle). The cartridge developed to accompany these new rifles was also radically different from its contemporary counterparts. The smaller rounds for the new rifle had a mass that was 66% percent lighter while traveling at warp-speed out of full-size barrels. Due to the fact that these rounds and cartridges were smaller and weighed less, soldiers could nearly triple their combat loads of ammunition as well. The adoption of the M-16 and its 5.56mm cartridge caused a military-arms paradigm shift. Eventually, every professional army moved to adopt modern rifles chambered with small caliber high velocity cartridges, often times the 5.56mm NATO itself. The Soviets themselves followed suit by essentially re-barreling their 7.62x39mm AKs into 5.45x39mm AK-74s.
While there are efforts and committees looking at moving beyond the classic AR-15 direct impingement protocol and its classic 5.56mm NATO cartridges, both are known entities in the world of small arms. Truthfully neither will be going away any time soon, just like the cornucopia of AK/RPK 47s, 74s, PKMs, SVDs, and even Mosins we see in Ukraine.
The Musket Still Abides
Even though the M-4 carbine has nearly replaced the M-16 rifle wholesale amongst Western militaries (as the former comes standard with a shorter barrel and a telescoping stock and easier to lug around, especially around structures and vehicles), a full size M-16 rifle is nothing to sneeze at either. The United States Marine Corps was the last branch of the American Armed Forces that used the M-16A4 in Iraq and Afghanistan until the early 2010s.
The biggest benefit of the full-size M-16 is that its 20-inch barrel lets 5.56mm ammunition develop peak velocities increasing this rifle’s effective range past 600 meters. Full size rifles also benefit from having a longer rifle-length direct impingement gas system which is smoother operating and places less stress on all springs and moving parts in the action. Moreover, the recoil impulse from a rifle-length AR-15 gas system provides for the most comfortable softest shooting experience. The biggest drawback of the M-16A4 is its fixed stock which is fairly long, especially for a military rifle. This stock has a length of pull of fourteen inches and besides making the weapon somewhat cumbersome, it makes the rifle harder to handle for people of short stature or who are wearing military kit. That said, assuming there are plenty of magazines and ammunition, it’s probably still a better choice than an old AK-74. The flat-top Picatinny railed upper receiver that’s standard on the M-16A4 makes it extremely convenient to mount any type of optic: red dots, LPVOs, ACOGs, traditional riflescope, etc. It is a safe bet to assume that soldiers and irregulars in Ukraine will make the most out of this versatility.
Ever since Raven Concealment Systems discontinued their flashlight pocket clip back in 20XX, there’s been a bit of a gap in the market.
The only real options if you wanted a finger ring were either some cobbled-together DIY solution, or the Thyrm Switchback.
Now for duty carry, or instances where concealment isn’t a high priority, the Switchback is a perfectly functional product. I have my own qualms with it, but that’s primarily due to its form not being optimally suited for my particular use case.
The newly released Retention Ring is a solution to those for whom this is a challenge.
Designed by Daniel Easterday of 11 Minute Defense, the Retention Ring consists of a neoprene ring secured to a length of piece of type 1 paracord with dual-wall adhesive heat shrink tubing.
This handy little pull-ring can be attached to a variety of small handhelds, and allows for the use of that hand while still retaining the tool.
When paired with the Thyrm Low Profile clip, the Retention Ring gives you all the same functionality of the old RCS clip and at roughly the same cost ($17.99 for the clip + $9 for the Ring)
Personally I like the closed-ended variant the most, since it’s the easiest to attach (and I’m not great at knots). I’ve found it works great on both my Cloud Defense MCH and my Surefire Stiletto Pro.
Whether being carried clipped to a pocket, or more discreetly on something like a Pocket Shield the Ring allows for positive retrieval and retention.
Full Disclosure: Daniel sent me these for T&E. I have since purchased a couple additional rings, as I see the value of them and think it’s a quality product.
Up to now I haven’t done any destructive testing on them, but most of my light usage tends not to be in extreme or austere conditions.
The Retention Ring is available for purchase at https://retentionring.com.
Daniel Easterday, creator of the Retention Ring, has a background that includes product development, assembly, prototyping, and Logistics. Daniel is also a firearms instructor in the Chicago suburbs, and he used his varied experience to turn what originally started as a niche solution to add an O Ring to his own flashlight into a product line that has multiple uses across a wide variety of industries.
While no sane person claims that legal cannabis and guns go together, it seems most people understand that like alcohol, one can enjoy both safely at separate times. Despite this in 2016, the ATF made a change to question 11 on the 4473 –the federal form that any transfer of ownership through a federally licensed firearms dealer requires to complete, and on which it is a federal crime to lie– making it explicitly clear that use of products containing cannabis, even in a state which had deemed it legal is enough to bar someone from exercising an enumerated right.
Specifically, the added language reads: “The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.” In layman’s terms, whatever your crazy state might think, the ATF is here to ensure that if you snort 13 marijuanas and go on a shooting spree, it won’t be with a legally transferred gun. Of all the ways a federal LEO could flex its authority to ensure the continued safety of the average American, it sure is one of them.
Since the feds made this move to heroically place themselves between the sleepy, bloodshot eyes of pot-related gun violence and the American public, that public has –resoundingly– voted for them to sit back down. In fact 37 states, D.C., and Guam now have some form of legal weed. Further, some of those states have even produced rulings that preclude concealed carry permit issuing agencies from discriminating against legal marijuana users. Legally owned cannabis and guns are somehow existing in the same household without producing violent waves of crime hundreds of thousands if not tens of million of times a day across the country. It’s almost like people who obey the law are poorly represented when it comes to the commission of violent crime.
Despite this, neither Trump nor Biden made any moves towards recognizing a states right to self-determination on this topic. In fact as recently as last year, Biden defended the ATF positioning itself as arbiter of your legal recreational decisions. Cannabis and guns seemed destined to be federally prohibited from cohabitating legally forever until just recently when, as it sometimes does, Oklahoma happened.
Citing Bruen, a Trump-appointed federal judge struck down the prohibition on gun ownership due to otherwise legal cannabis use. The historical test Bruen requires is shaping up to cut a swath through a bevy of restrictive gun laws that have sat on the books unopposed for decades. Cannabis and guns is just one small facet of this, as the wave of court cases challenging laws that blatantly violate it illustrates.
While there is certainly potential for abuse –as there is with any liberty– either we must presuppose our fellow countrymen are adults who are capable of making responsible decisions, or we must abandon the pretext of liberty and grant the feds power to restrict everyone’s behavior, “for their own safety”. Regardless of the party calling for the restriction, those who love liberty should resist. Allowing ownership of both cannabis and guns is simply an extension of this line of thinking, and no freedom-minded person should be threatened by it on principle.
If there’s any individual weapon that deserves the most credit for beating back Nazi Germany, it might be the legendary bolt-action Mosin-Nagant rifle.
The Soviet Union made them in absolutely huge numbers — and they’re still available and rather cheap compared to their contemporaries. What’s more extraordinary is that the basic design is more than a century old.
Even now, rebels carry Mosin-Nagants alongside more modern weapons as in conflicts from Ukraine to the Middle East.
But there’s good reasons for that. It’s because of the rifle’s simplicity, ruggedness and a design philosophy summed up as “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
During the late 19th century, the Russian Empire wanted to upgrade its arsenal. Instead of its existing Berdan II single-shot rifles, the empire wanted a cutting edge repeating weapon that fired smaller but higher-pressure metallic cartridges.
Russian army officer and engineer Sergei Ivanovich Mosin designed the new rifle’s action — a straightforward bolt action that “cocks-on-open.” Belgian weapons designer Leon Nagant improved the weapon’s feeding mechanism.
In 1891, Russia adopted Mosin’s rifle and christened it the “Three-Line Rifle, Model of 1891.”
The rifle has few moving parts — which is part of its beauty. Its beefy mechanism only consists of seven pieces, while its trigger group consists of three. The heavy stock is Russian birch wood.
These rifles have seen a lot of battles. Russians troops carried them during the 1905 war with Japan. The rifles served with Russian troops during World War I. The Bolsheviks carried those same rifles again when they fought to create the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1922.
But the Soviets introduced the most popular variant — the Mosin-Nagant 91/30. In 1930, the Soviets modernized the rifle, installed several major upgrades and added the “30” designation to its name.
Its basic design was almost 40 years old then, and people are still using it.
A close shot of my 1934 Tula “Hexagonal” M91/30 stock wrist and action.
Gunsmiths shortened the 91/30 by a few inches, and calibrated its sights in meters. The older imperial rifles have sights calibrated in archaic arshin units standardized during the reign of Peter the Great.
But if you see a Mosin-Nagant, it’s most likely a 91/30 from World War II with sights measured in meters. The Soviet army entered the war equipped with this triokhlineika — or “three-liner” — as their standard issue bolt-action battle rifle.
The Soviet Union made millions of Mosin-Nagants, and manufactured them in their greatest numbers during the early 1940s. During the middle of the war, the Kremlin developed the M-44 carbine.
This wasn’t the first Mosin-Nagant carbine, but the M-44 features a distinctive integral folding bayonet which better met the Soviet army’s needs. The carbine is roughly 10 inches shorter than the 91/30, making it easier to carry and use in cities.
Toward the end of the rifle’s service life, the Soviets shifted to arming soldiers with carbines instead of the full-sized version. Despite the carbine’s better handling, its shorter barrel means that shots are louder and the muzzle flash is brighter.
The Tula and Izhevsk arsenals produced the bulk of the Soviet army’s Mosin-Nagants. Izhevsk produced more, as its factories were safely tucked between the Ural Mountains away from the front lines.
After the war, Moscow widely distributed them to communist countries and Soviet allies. Mosin-Nagants appeared in China, North Korea, Vietnam and the Middle East. Today, pro-Russian separatists wield them in Ukraine, as do Islamist groups in North Africa and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Other non-communist nations — most notably Finland — used Mosin-Nagant variants. During its two wars with the Soviet Union, Finland produced domestic variants and retrofitted captured Soviet rifles.
Shooters and collectors widely consider the Finnish rifles to be among the finest and most accurate Mosin-Nagant variants ever produced. They also fetch a considerably higher price.
Like many Russian weapons, manufacturers engineered the Mosin-Nagant with generous tolerances so it would be able to fire in a wide range of conditions, especially during brutal winters.
To suit Russian soldiers and their bulky overcoats, the Mosin-Nagant’s stock is slightly shorter than many early and mid-century battle rifles. This can make them slightly awkward to shoot if you’re not bundled up — but modern shooters often attach accessories for extra length.
The Mosin’s full-size cartridge — the 7.62 x 54-millimeter Rimmed — is highly reliable. Its tapered sides make its smooth enough to feed and extract from dirty or fouled chambers.
A 7.62x54mm Rimmed cartridge. image credit: 7.62x54r.net
The cartridge’s geometry makes it easy to produce accurate match or specialty ammunition. The Finns, in particular, manufactured highly reliable examples of this cartridge.
The 7.62 x 54R’s potency is comparable to the West’s 7.62 x 51-millimeter NATO cartridge and even its old American contemporary, the .30/06 Springfield. Not surprisingly, this Russian cartridge has the distinction of being the longest serving military round in continuous use.
Detractors say that the Soviet Mosin-Nagant is not as refined as its wartime and world-famous rival, the German Mauser Karabiner 98k rifle. But the counter-argument is that the Soviet Union operated under very different circumstances.
Sure, the Russian rifle is less refined. It was for a war-time peasant army facing an existential threat. Versions from World War II lack the fit and finish of pre-war rifles, but they’re accurate and sturdy enough to suit a battlefield.
Both the Mosin-Nagant and Karabiner hold five cartridges in their internal magazines. Both have similar tangent sights, and both will bruise the shoulder after shooting several dozen rounds thanks to their punishing recoil.
But the Mosin-Nagant is robust, simple to maintain and easy to mass-produce quickly. No wonder the Soviets carried it to victory, and why it keeps popping up around the world.
A soldier standing around with a PU Mosin Sniper Rifle, sometime during the Ukraine-Russia conflict in 2022. image credit: reddit
Author’s Note 2023: While I certainly see the hyperbolic sensationalization of pointing out that Russian troops and their allies are using outdated equipment, which they are–it is also fair to point out that in most cases these are PU Mosin Sniper Rifles (Or rifles with affixed aftermarket optics). Putting a riflescope on a bolt-action rifle made in 1943 that’s still in working condition fundamentally isn’t any different than putting a scope on a Tikka T3 chambered in 6.5mm Creedmoor today; it’s just that one will be more clunky than the other.
This article was edited for GAT Daily and I originally wrote it for War Is Boring back in 2015. I reposted it here because the article was originally inspired by the 2014 part of the Ukraine conflict which obviously escalated last year again.
By the time this posts, the ATF will have just released their final brace ruling and published it in the Federal Register.
Ever since they brought the brace ban back into the conversation on January 13th, there’s been an understandable amount of anger and frustration in the online discussion.
Unfortunately, some people have allowed the anonymity of the keyboard and the cloak of righteousness to lead them to behavior that they probably wouldn’t exhibit in person.
We are at a pivotal stage, and have the chance to either make great headway or do irreparable damage to our cause.
If these events have motivated you to contact your legislators and express your displeasure in a well articulated fashion, donate to one of the 2A activist groups with a track record of productive action and success, or otherwise involve yourself in the process, then this article isn’t really directed at you.
If, however, your indignation over the ATF’s overreach led to emotional rants on social media, combative statements about “fedbois”, or other belligerent conduct, congratulations. All you’re doing is playing directly into the caricature of the unreasonable gun-zealot that’s being painted of us by the opposition.
These emotional ramblings do nothing but make the poster feel good and unravel the hard work of those that are actually struggling to make headway.
You’re not helping, and frankly I resent that people are smugly patting themselves on the back while simultaneously making life harder for those that are working towards productive change.
Dunking on the anti-gun crowd does nothing. Those people are already so staunchly entrenched in their belief that they’re unlikely to ever accept our perspective as valid.
There is, however, a large swath of society that is utterly agnostic on the subject. This is where optics matter. Sterile facts and extreme fear-mongering aren’t an effective way to win hearts and minds. Far too many people get fixated on making sure everyone knows just how right they think they are that they completely miss opportunities to actually be persuasive.
In a rather morbid case of semi-prophetic happenstance, USA Today penned and published this article relating the the attempt to balance school safety and security concerns with the rights and access of students, especially those with disabilities.
On January 6th, a 6 y/o student described as being “acutely disabled” shot their teacher on a day they had deviated dramatically from the student’s care plan of direct parental involvement. The school’s failings in this case are catastrophic enough that there have been several staffing changes and the teacher is suing the school district for damages.
The methods put into place to try and prevent a repeat incident include things like, clear backpacks, metal detectors, two more resource officers, and so forth.
All procedures and devices that, if you’ll recall with me, the Parkland students grew very tired of very quickly. They considered it, rightly so, invasive and dehumanizing to be subject to search, need to have transparent bags to bring their items into the school, and pass through metal detectors, wanding, and if necessary be searched physically. Female students commented on the embarrassment of having items of a personal or hygienic nature visible for all to see, or their clothes and under garments visible if they needed to change for a practice or PhysEd class.
In short, they discovered that the measures used to harden a structure against the possibility of a future attack suck to deal with. They are intrusive, dehumanizing, treat everyone as a potential attacker, are often hands on, and have no regard for whatever personal level of privacy and dignity you would like to maintain.
Why?
Because they have to do that to be even remotely effective. Once you have taken the steps from passive, observant, and reactive security measures to active ones deviations from this invasion of personal privacy are ways through the screen. That’s how security works, it is a screen, a filter. It is designed to catch what presence, consequence, and morality do not deter.
‘Subject to search’ is a precarious thing, and it has been notably abused by authorities. It is imperfect at best.
But that is how security works. Sifting through the normal to try and catch the rare dangerous abnormality.
You balance these against the known factors,
You can’t screen enough to close all avenues, period
Even a temporary failure can result in a catastrophic breach
You are actively irritating and violating the privacy of those you are trying to protect and this will annoy, unnerve, and anger them
There will be mistakes
There can be abuses by your screening staff that dramatically undermine your position
The larger the staff and the more limited your budget for compensation and paying professionals, the more likely an incident occurs at some point
So when we look at what a prudent, yet respectful, level of security and screening are stacked against the rights of students to participate in a publicly funded learning environment, especially if they have learning or physical difficulties, it is a volatile and complex equation. You are pushing the rights of dozens, hundreds, even thousands of people into a small space. You are, as a school, simultaneously responsible for several things for all of these people, their safety and their educational experience being high on that list. Those two items will come into conflict. Students and staff will come into conflict, making for situations where a judgement call must be made and someone will lose. Someone will be put off or denied, someone or everyone’s privacy will suffer, there will be aggrieved parties, and rightly or wrongly they will resent you for that call that had to be made.
This is how security works. It’s juggling volatile chemicals, but the chemicals all have a mind of their own too. Make a tiny mistake, get a small burn. Probably no biggie, but it was a close call. That’s scary, some of the chemicals think it was scary too and might demand you juggle differently. That juggling might be ten times harder or make the juggling entirely ineffective at preventing spills, drops, and burns, but it makes the chemicals feel better about being juggled.
Make a big mistake, miss a catch, or stumble, or be distracted too long and it drops and explodes. People die.
That is security.
Benjamin Franklin was not being hyperbolic by saying trading freedom for safety results in neither, that’s just the reality of the diminishing returns of safety and security efforts.
A critical factor in building or customizing an AR-15 is the choice between AR15 barrel profiles. The profile, which defines the shape and size of the barrel, can greatly affect the performance and functionality of the firearm.
Let’s take a look at the different AR-15 barrel profiles available and help you understand the pros and cons of each so you can make an informed decision. From heavier barrel profiles to lightweight pencil barrel profiles, we’ll cover it all.
Whether you’re a competitive shooter, a hunter, or just a hobbyist, this guide will help you choose the perfect barrel profile for your specific needs and goals.
AR Barrel Profiles Explained
The term “barrel profile” refers to the thickness of a barrel on an AR-15 style rifle, such as the Faxon Sentry 16” 5.56 Rifle. Different barrel profiles can impact the performance of the gun in various ways.
For instance, thinner barrels are lightweight and easy to handle, while thicker barrels provide more stability by adding weight to the front of the gun and can withstand more heat.
It’s essential to consider the trade-offs of different barrel options available in the market when making a choice.
Let’s now look at the different AR-15 barrel profiles to see what makes each one unique.
Gunner Profile
The Gunner profile is a blend of two of the best-performing profiles of all time, Gov’t and Pencil.
Faxon’s Gunner profile combines the durability of the Gov’t profile with the weight savings and maneuverability of the Pencil profile.
The Gunner profile brings the rifle’s balance back towards the shooter’s body, limiting fatigue and allowing for shooting, training, or hunting all day long.
Government/SOCOM Profile
A SOCOM barrel for an AR-15 is designed differently from the standard M4/A2 barrel.
Instead of being consistently thick throughout, it has a thinner section past the gas block and a thicker section near the chamber. In addition, SOCOM AR15 barrel profiles often have a slot for attaching a grenade launcher and provide a balance between strength and weight.
If you’re looking for a barrel that can handle sustained shooting while still being lightweight, a SOCOM profile barrel may be a good option for you.
Pencil Profile
The pencil barrel is the original profile for the AR-15, typically measuring 0.625 inches in diameter.
It is known for being slim and lightweight, making it easy to carry and handle. However, due to its thinness, it may overheat more quickly during rapid firing, leading to elastic deformation or warping, which can affect reliability and accuracy.
Unlike run-of-the-mill pencil barrels, Faxon Firearms barrels are properly heat-treated and stress-relieved to improve heat resistance and longevity.
The durability of this AR15 barrel profile is ideal for shooters with a light or medium shooting schedule.
AR Barrel Profiles: Finding Your Match
The barrel profile of an AR-15 rifle can greatly affect its overall performance and handling.
The three most common barrel profiles are the Gunner, Government, and Pencil. The Government/SOCOM profile is the thickest and heaviest option, providing the most stability and accuracy but also adding extra weight to the rifle.
The pencil profile is the thinnest and lightest option, making it easier to handle and carry, but sacrificing some stability and accuracy. The government profile is a balance between the two, offering a good compromise between weight and performance.
Ultimately, the choice of barrel profile will depend on the individual’s personal preferences and intended use of the rifle. Therefore, it is important to consider the trade-offs and choose the barrel profile that best suits your needs.
Currently there is a massive Chinese Spy Balloon over Montana that the Pentagon has been tracking for a few days now. So, I’m sure that brings up a few questions.
This a photo of the Chinese balloon released by the Pentagon.
Why haven’t they shot it down? According to the Department of Defense, the risk is not worth the reward yet. Technology is on that balloon that should be attempted to be saved. Also, the debris. Not just debris like hot air balloon shrapnel, but there isn’t enough knowledge known yet of what could be on that balloon. Nerve agents that are released when shot down? We just don’t know. According to a senior defense official, “It was the “strong recommendation” of senior military leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, “not to take kinetic action due to the risk to safety and security of people on the ground from the possible debris field,” the official said”-CNN
Where is it headed? As I am writing this article it is currently over Montana and headed toward Virginia.
What is the elevation of it? Good luck taking pop shots at the balloon. It is currently at 64,000 ft which is double what a commercial airplane flies at.
If you’re wondering what an American high altitude balloon looks like, here you go. Photo: Defense Post
All in all, it is sketchy and a little bit freaky. While officials are stating that the aircraft isn’t able to gain “significant” intel gathering, the feeling of it being up there just doesn’t sit right. So, I implore you to keep up with it with an easy google search.
Additional Note: In Keith Finch’s words, (the editor of Gatdaily) “my desire to have NORAD broadcast its exact location and time like they do Santa so that folks can make obscene gestures at it is extreme.” If only we had a fun way to track this balloon at make light of severe illegal intel gathering from one of the largest enemies of the United States right now..oof..
A mere 23 days after Illinois’ Democratic led efforts to restrict their residents’ 2nd Amendment rights, blaming the existence of firearms for the state of crime ridden Chicago is an old scapegoat after all, the Illinois 5th District has told Illinois proper, ‘Hey, not so fast.‘
On January 24, Effingham County Judge Joshua Morrison ordered a temporary restraining order in response to the lawsuit which prevented its enforcement, and said in his ruling that the plaintiffs are “being immediately and irreparably harmed each day in which their fundamental right to bear arms is being denied.”
The law banned the sale and manufacture of AR-15s and AK-47s, long gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition, and handgun magazines that hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition. The law also extended the state’s “red flag” law scope, and enabled a person to be prohibited from purchasing a firearm if they were on the list for a longer period of time.
The Associated Press reports, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, a Democrat, appealed Morrison’s ruling but the three-judge appellate court upheld the restraining order in a 2-to-1 decision.
The appellate court said the restraining order can stay in place and extended its scope beyond the plaintiffs to apply to all of Illinois, reports Fox News.
The court said the plaintiffs’ suit had “a likelihood of success on the merits” in that the gun law likely violated their equal protection as granted under the US Constitution. [emphasis added]
So PICA, whose title is not quite as ironic as the SAFE Act in New York but to the same effect, is now on hold. If PICA fails here it could signal the fall of assault weapon bans nationwide, all thanks to Illinois Democrats not being able to leave well enough alone and try to solve their crime problems by solving… you know… crimes.
Even Illinois’ own courts have signaled the law is unlikely to pass final judicial review, before even reaching federal courts. This may signal an attempt by the courts to contain spillover onto other states with similar laws, like New York and California, as if it remains a state court handling internal matters there would be less national precedent to rely upon.
Photo Credit: Billy Schuerman/The Virginian-Pilot, via Associated Press
The Richneck Elementary School shooting involved the –thankfully non-fatal– Jan 6 shooting of teacher Abigail Zwerner by her 6y/o student. This bizarre tragedy was a shock even with limited initial details that always accompany early accounts of such incidents. The extreme youth of the shooter makes this a marked outlier among the already rare and difficult to understand issue of school shootings, but the more one learns about this event, the more absurd it becomes. So the latest news of the Principal “leaving” the school, while remaining employed by the district may not be a shock –as it follows the resignation or removal of the Assistant Principal, and school superintendent– but the announcement of a lawsuit filed by the injured teacher, and the reason for that lawsuit certainly could qualify, but first some details.
The student involved in the school shooting was described by family as “acutely disabled” and had a resultant care plan that involved a parent attending class with them. The family also described the gun in question as legally purchased, and stored on a shelf with a trigger lock. The day of the shooting was reportedly the first week since the implementation of the care plan in which a parent was not present with the student, but neither this nor the status of the gun used in the shooting are the subject of Zwerner’s lawsuit: inaction on the part of school administrators is instead the focus.
So how did the administration fail so badly as to warrant a lawsuit by the one victim of this school shooting? Catastrophically, it appears: Four times on Jan 6, alarms were raised about the possibility of violence on campus by three separate faculty. Between 11:15AM, and the shooting at 2:00PM, administrators were informed that the same student had: -Threatened to beat up another student -Had their bag searched for a gun -Told a student at recess that they were in possession of a gun and would shoot them if they told anyone A fourth school employee requested to search the student, but was told the the day was almost over, and to “wait the situation out because the school day was almost over.“
As more details come to light, this school shooting seems to be less of a random tragedy, and more of a complete mishandling of reports of a student with a gun leading to a decidedly preventable outcome that has spurred only reactionary action. Richneck Elementary students will return to class with clear backpacks, metal detectors, and two additional school security officers. While these efforts aren’t unwelcome, they are only being implemented because those responsible for keeping their students and employees safe allowed their inaction to precipitate a school shooting that never had to happen.
On Streamlights ProTac 2.0 products there is a collapsible sheild that protects a charging port. This port enables the user to charge the battery while it is in the product.
The ProTac 2.0 Line is an updated line to your favorite products with some new ones thrown in. This includes an updated long gun light, updated headlamp, and updated primary flashlight. This line was released to highlight the larger battery that Streamlight made for these products. Not only is it larger but it also charges by USB-C which honestly, that is what everything is shifting towards now.
Bigger/USB-C/and Easy Access Battery
The battery system from Streamlight is a genius battery due to it not just being a battery. Not only can it be used between multiple products but it also can be charged while still inside of these products due to an access port within the products.
On Streamlights ProTac 2.0 products there is a collapsible sheild that protects a charging port. This port enables the user to charge the battery while it is in the product.
The Battery
The updates to the SL-B50 battery itself this year is that it is 46% bigger which means more power. There is also a light that will show through the end of the battery, red for charging, green for fully charged. It is USB-C chargeable which is a large updated considering the old smaller style battery was Micro-USB.
For those nerdy guys, the SL-B50 battery is a 3.6V, 4900mAh battery and rechargeable at least 500 times. If the battery dies or somehow won’t recharge, simply send the battery back, no need to send the whole product.
The updated ProTac 2.0 batteries allow for longer battery life. On the top is the updated larger battery, on the bottom is the older battery. Due to this change to the battery many pro tac products have also been upgraded.
The Products with the Battery
This battery can be used with the ProTac 2.0 Primary Light, ProTac 2.0 Headlamp, and ProTac 2.0 Rail Mounted Light. Due to the battery being bigger the products did need to be updated to accept it such as the body size and the connection points. The most impressive part of this system though is how to ensure that the product has full battery power. While the battery is rechargeable you don’t need to take the battery out of the product to charge it. All of the ProTac 2.0 products have a slidable access port to the battery port. Simply slide the access port down insert your USB-C cable, charge, and then unhook and slide the access ring back over the port. Genius
Note: Don’t forget to close the slidable ring back over the port. While these products are water resistant, it isn’t ideal with even the best of products to let water just drip straight into a battery pack.Maybe color it red or put a piece of tape to not forget?
Streamlight also made it so that there is no way to screw up connection points or the product by inserting the battery wrong. Such as on the headlamp, it literally won’t go in if upside down.
The two connection points shown here on the updated ProTac 2.0 Headlamp ensure that the battery will simply not fit inside the body of the product if installed incorrectly.
Yay, another flashlight! Go ahead and add this one to your list, the updated ProTac 2.0 Flashlight. A perfect primary light or an inside the middle console light, this flashlight will include the new and improved battery with USB-C charging port.
The ProTac 2.0 Headlamp from Streamlight is comfortable to wear with or without a hard hat. Meaning all of those late night walks with the dogs, leave your hard hat at home.
There are also some new products released within this line such as this cute itty bitty Syclone Jr. table sitting or hangable light. Meant to not take up a lot of space and be easy to pack, this little light gives off 210 lumens and can rotate 360 degrees. It can also run 3-8 hours dependent on output level. Perfect for an easy to throw in the pack work light.
The Syclone Jr is the cutest little light that can be thrown into your pack or placed on your bench with minimal space taken up. Note the size of it compared to my hand.
The TLR8-Sub Gun light with green laser has updated paddle switches with high and low options and a safe-off feature.
New vs old Streamlight Long gun lights.Ready to go for your smaller guns, the TLR8 subgun light has a green laser and updated paddles.
Honorable Mention
While not part of the ProTac 2.0 series and still only chargeable by mico USB, these lights will always get an honorable mention in any streamlight article. The MicroStream USB Pocket light is a staple due to being such an easy secondary light to have in your pants pock. Small and skinny but still outputting 250 lumens, it’s a must to have on the EDC tray. The Macrostream is a big larger and serves the same purpose.
The Streamlight Micro and Macro Streams are the perfect secondary light that quickly clips into your pants pocket.
There was a time in America when children were commonly armed, and kids purchased rifles at hardware stores or won them as prizes. Depending on where you lived and when it wasn’t all that long ago. As a kid, I traveled with a cheap German .22LR revolver when I went exploring the wilderness, and I’m not that old. However, there was a time when it was so normal it spawned an entire niche of firearms called the Boy’s rifle.
What’s a Boy’s Rifle
As the name implies, these were designed and built for kids, mostly male. Boy’s rifles arguably first existed in 1890 and seemed to be popular until the 1950s and seemingly were gone by 1960. These rifles were produced by a wide variety of companies, both big and small. They tended to share a number of traits that define them as Boy’s rifles.
Classic Steven’s Boys rifles (Invaluable)
They were cheap guns. Often very simple, somewhat ugly, and made to be beaten up and abused by the ruffian of an owner they had. The best model cost 5.50 in 1934.
They were rimfire guns, most commonly some form of .22, but there were various rimfire options like .25 Rimfire and .32 Rimfire that were not that uncommon at certain time periods.
These guns are typically single-shot firearms.
Those are the most common features of these guns. The most common form of operation appears to have been bolt action rifles, although falling block actions weren’t that uncommon. The sights across the top were often very simple and typically blade and notch style firearms.
Classic Boy’s Rifles
The first ever one of these rifles also coined the name. The Stevens Boys Rifles were really cool, and as a grown man, I want one. They were rimfire-falling block rifles. They came in numerous configurations, with their ‘Crack Shot’ model being the most popular. These guns were produced from 1890 to 1943.
Other companies picked up on this trend over the years, and the Hamilton Model 51 and later Hoban Model 45 exemplified the Boy’s Rifle. The Hoban Model 45 was even designed to look like a military rifle with a false magazine and a wood handguard that looked like it was straight off an M1 Carbine.
The Hoban Model 45 (Invaluable)
The fanciest of these guns was the Winchester Model 67. The rise of these entry-level, single-shot, cheap rifles was huge in the 1930s. This led a major company to develop their own, resulting in the classic Model 67 Junior Model, commonly called the Boy’s rifle.
These guns rooted themselves in a nice little spot in the gun stores of the time. They taught a generation of kids how to shoot. Some of that generation went on to fight the Nazis and Japanese and ensure democracy was preserved. Kids learned responsibility and safety with these rifles, and that’s a skill lacking today.
The Modern Boy’s Rifle
While these guns aren’t called Boy’s Rifles anymore, they aren’t gone from the market. Guns like the Cricket series exist that are basically a Boy’s rifle. Small, light, .22 caliber rifles that are manually operated and fire a single shot before needing to reload. Heck, some of them even look like modern military guns.
I think these rifles might be the most important rifles on the market. They aim to create new shooters. New shooters will continue to fuel the 2nd Amendment and the fight that comes in defending it.
