Who doesn’t love a good rimfire rifle or pistol? These guns have provided generations of shooters with affordable, easy-to-shoot firearms. Most of us likely learned how to shoot on a rimfire platform. That’s nothing new. Rimfire weapons have been around since 1845. Today we are going to examine the early history of rimfire guns, as well as the advent of gallery guns.
The Creation of Rimfire Cartridges
Louis-Nicolas Flobert created the first rimfire metallic cartridge way back when in 1845. Flobert is a Frenchman who started the world of rimfire weapons when he attached a very small bullet to a percussion cap. There was no powder, and the only thing that tossed that bb was the propellant from the cap. This became known as 6mm Flobert but is also called .22 BB Cap and .22 CB Cap.
The little round moved at about 700 feet per second. Flobert took this projectile design and began crafting Flobert guns, as they were called. Flobert guns would evolve into several different named platforms, including parlor guns, gallery guns, and saloon guns.
Flobert’s creation also brought about the idea of a brass-cased cartridge. Metallic cartridges would go on to form superior repeating firearms and changed the world of firearms and warfare rapidly. Although, that’s a subject for another time.
The Flobert guns were often single-shot pistols and rifles designed for recreational shooting. These low-powered little guns were light recoiling, and the report wasn’t exactly loud. Being able to quickly load and reload the guns kept the momentum and thrill of recreational shooting going.
This spawned the rise of indoor and outdoor shooting galleries. As their popularity grew, it wasn’t uncommon for homes to have a parlor just for recreational shooting. As someone currently building a home, I’m trying to sell my wife on the idea of a shooting parlor.
The World of Gallery Guns
Shooting galleries became quite popular in the United States. They could be found at fairs and carnivals, in saloons and bars, as well as in town squares and theme parks. After World War I, these galleries became very popular. They allowed men and women to test their skills and knock down targets, and ring bull’s eyes. Game owners set up steel targets on conveyor belts. Shooters tested their skills with their gallery guns on moving targets in all manner of different shapes.
Photo Rich’s Gun Shop
Some companies even mixed in the early advent of film and pictures to create an early form of video game. A film or series of stills would suddenly present a target, and shooters would have to engage it as they moved. These Cinematic shooting gallery devices became quite fancy, with the film projected onto moving paper to avoid the paper filling with too many holes and becoming a distraction.
The sport became so popular that Winchester, Colt, and Remington all produced some form of gallery gun. The most famous gallery guns in North America were pump action rifles chambered in .22 Short. The Winchester 1890 and 62 were pump actions, as was the Colt Lightning.
The design of these guns implemented simple tube magazines and an exposed hammer instead of a manual safety. Long barrels and exposed open iron sights offered a good sight radius for accurate shooting.
A Different Time
It’s easy to see why shooting galleries were so popular. Shooting is fun. Even the most ardent anti-gun advocate would enjoy plinking with a rimfire rifle. Game owners advertised shooting galleries to men, women, and children and captured them all. The guns were lightweight and light recoiling, meaning anyone, regardless of skill, age, or gender, could pick up a gallery gun and hit a target.
The resounding ping of lead on steel offered the same thrill you and I get from hitting steel these days. These gallery guns and games still exist today, but they use air guns rather than actual guns, and it’s still fun. Those days were different days, and guns were a more common sight. While I’m sure accidents happened, people seemed to be a little less foolish around firearms back then.
These days you can get a reproduction gallery gun from Rossi, and it’s a fun little plinker. I’d love to see some form of the Shooting Gallery return. I’d imagine it would be a fun and safe way to draw new shooters in. Although, it would preferably be at a gun range and not a county fair.
I wrote about the study on Tuesday, the JAMA Network one. The one with the HEAT Maps showing where the fatalities were coming from. Lori Lightfoot, mayoring the mostly peaceful city of Chicago, graces this article as her city typifies some of the problems.
CNN Health also read this study, but they seem to have jumped far more alarmist than I did despite reading the same figures in the same 32 year time frame. They do an excellent job of not quite lying while describing the data, as you’ll see. They do this by constantly changing the data ranges they are comparing to always present the most dramatic contrast.
CNN my friends, the contrast is shocking enough in its raw format that we don’t need to compound the problem.
CNN — Firearm deaths surged in the US during the Covid-19 pandemic, killing a record number of people in 2021. But as America’s gun epidemic gets worse, its burden is not equal.
I pointed this out in my write-up as well, homicides and suicides are claiming vastly different lives. It is almost as if they were, at least, two separate problems.
A new study published Tuesday in JAMA Network Open analyzed firearm deaths over the past three decades – a total of more than 1 million lives lost since 1990. The researchers found that firearm mortality rates increased for most demographic groups in recent years – especially during the pandemic – and vast disparities persisted.
I wonder what they would say about firearm mortality in Europe during the 1930′ and 40’s, or 1910’s for that matter. Yes, the pandemic and the governments responses to is combined with trends in general societal civility and those government responses presented us with a bad hand.
While recent data shows some familiar patterns, the sheer scale of the issue brings the United States to a “new moment in the history of firearm fatalities,” said Dr. Eric Fleegler, a pediatric emergency physician and researcher with Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School and co-author of the study.
Every moment is a new moment in the history of firearms fatalities. Given the analytical tone of the remainder of the study this appears to be CNN’s pick in most inflammatory quotes.
“At this moment in time, we have seen a dramatic increase that is really unparalleled,” he said. “During the time of the Covid pandemic, going from 2019 up to 2021, we’ve seen over a 25% increase in fatalities in two years alone. That has never happened.”
We have also never shut down the country the way we did and pushed people beyond the economic brink in the service industries while paying them pennies on the dollars they would have been earning. We demonized, we demanded compliance, we were lied to by omission and exaggeration and during all this stress we had violent riots in cities around the nation. There were many things that had never happened before, they culminated in a very bad period.
Violence became a more potent and valued currency as the government pulled the rug out from under the citizenry, ignored and demonized large chunks of them as politically inconvenient to shore up their short term power base, and then failed over and over again to reestablish the trust we should place in our society and its leadership. This is many problems and the longer politicians keep crafting short term win policies that erode the trust of everyone outside their fanatical political base we will keep sliding further into a very predictable period of tribalism and denial.
Overall, men are significantly more at risk. Nearly 86% of all firearm deaths since 1990 have been among men, according to the study, which used data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The researchers found that firearm homicides were highest among Black men, and firearm suicide rates were highest among senior White men.
Water still wet, yes men make up that vast majority of violent offenders and victims. They also make up the majority of suicides. As progressive a world as we pretend to live in and the soft offices jobs allow for, men still do the vast majority of hard labor and are vilified for weakness in their mental health.
Rates of firearm homicide for both men and women nearly doubled between 2014 and 2021, but men were still more than five times more likely to die than women. Rates of firearm suicide were also seven times higher among men than women in 2021, despite increasing suicide rates among women over time.
Here is where we start to see CNN jump around in their comparison groups or leaving out numbers where a number would provide stronger context. For example, ‘despite increasing suicide rates among women over time‘ would be much easier to understand if we knew what ‘over time’ and ‘increasing rates’ numbers were. A 0.5% increase between 2019 and 2021 is just as covered by the statement as a 14% increase from 1990 to present.
The racial disparities are even starker. The homicide rate among young Black men – 142 homicide deaths for every 100,000 Black men ages 20 to 24 – was nearly 10 times higher than the overall firearm death rate in the US in 2021.
But how was it compared to other firearm homicide rates or total death rates 20-24? Yes that is a shocking contrast but it is also worth noting that age range is among the most violent for males period, not just Black men, 15-29 are roughly the violent years and those who make it past are increasingly likely to mellow if they were previously violent participants.
Homicide rates among Black and Hispanic men were highest in the 20 to 24 age group. But for White men, the rate was highest in the 30 to 34 age group. When comparing these groups, the homicide rate was nearly four times higher among young Hispanic men compared with White men, and the homicide rate among young Black men was a staggering 22 times higher than among White men.
Poverty, illiteracy, broken homes, and crime as a means to provide are also highest among Black and Hispanic men in that age range while White men in the 30-34 age range will arguably have changed motive spheres. White men, and their staggeringly high suicide rate of 13 times greater than Black or Hispanic men should also bear scrutiny.
It’s almost like this is more than one problem.
We’ll skip now and just pick out a few choice bits.
Urban areas had a higher burden of firearm mortality than rural areas, too.
You don’t say.
There are two key factors driving community gun violence, says Jonathan Jay, an assistant professor at Boston University School of Public Health: disadvantage at the neighborhood level and exposure to gun violence at the individual level.
“Gun violence is most likely in spaces that show signs of physical disinvestment. Sometimes that looks like unkempt, vacant lots or abandoned houses that are boarded up, maybe a high density of liquor stores and a low density of healthy food options,” he said.
I think what you are saying is that the most impoverished and already troubled areas, those that had the least margin of available resource to draw upon when the service economy got nuked by the Federal government, were also the most immediately impacted and the elements of it that were already likely to use violence as an alternative currency to currency did so. But yeah, lack of Wholefoods locations is another way to say that I suppose. These events have also occurred under the auspices of the ACAB, ‘Space to Riot’, ‘Mostly Peaceful Protests’, CHAZ, etc. where the legitimacy of state authority and justice is viewed as both weak and corrupt for various reasons by various factions and with variable levels of legitimacy to the statement.
Chicago is about to three in a row the number of years it has exceeded 700 homicides in the city. But don’t worry, a ban on semi-automatics will solve everything they promise.
In short CNN blames everything on the mere existence of firearms and cannot be bothered to puzzle out or ascribe deeper motivations to the separate problems. Also anyone who was made to feel unsafe by the combination of riots, police not responding during the lockdowns, and surge in violent crime and then went to purchase a firearm to defend themselves… they won’t say you’re actually part of the problem but they would like to heavily imply that.
There’s more beating around the bush about how the lockdowns and destruction of portions of the service economy that at risk groups relied on for income and stability absolutely triggered the increase. Turns out that if you greatly increase the stress on people who already use violence as a way to solve issues that they use that tool more and not less, even if you told them going outside was bad… unless mostly peacefully you’re protesting.
But the analysis helps identify high-risk groups that can benefit most from targeted interventions.
Hmm, right at the end we get this single line that seems to imply that this is, shockingly, more than one problem.
But because its CNN we close out with a doctor saying that kids who are injured by gunfire make him sad.
Dr. Christopher Rees, an emergency department physician at Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, researcher at Emory University School of Medicine and co-author of the study, moved from Boston to Atlanta a little over a year ago. He said he’s cared for “far more” children who have been injured from firearms in Atlanta than he did in Boston – living out the trends he found in his research.
“Every single time I just think, ‘One, this is awful. Two, this is someone’s kid.’ And I immediately think about my two children at home. And then three, I think, ‘This didn’t have to happen, especially to a child,’ ” he said. “It is very personal each time.”
Thank you, Doc. Literally nobody but the most vile human beings on earth are excited when kids get hurt. I’m glad we could reiterate that point and only got a single sentence on ‘targeted interventions’, which again is code for ‘this is more thanone problem.’
The 90s were a wild time. Companies named their guns like they were in a video game. Well, one specific company did, Cobray. Cobray would be a great Twitter troll. In the 1980s and 1990s, they were a thorn in the side of gun controllers. At one point, they named their revolving shotguns Street Sweepers. The Street Sweeper is not a very good firearm by any metric, but it’s legacy is what we are talking about today.
The Street Sweeper revolving shotguns were quite controversial in their day. They were cheap and poorly made clones of the South African Armsel Striker shotguns. If you mention them in the right places, you’ll hear all about how Clinton banned revolving shotguns and the Street Sweeper.
That’s not technically true. At the behest of Handgun Control Inc., Clinton instructed the Secretary of Treasury to declare three specific shotguns as destructive devices. This placed them under the purview of the NFA. Federal Code allows the Secretary of Treasury to label weapons above .50 caliber as destructive devices by decree. Those three shotguns were the Armsel Striker, the Street Sweeper, and the USAS-12.
(It bears mentioning they also wanted the Mossberg 500 declared a Destructive Device.)
This action has led many to believe outright that revolving shotguns are always destructive devices. As if they are declared NFA weapons like machine guns, suppressors, or anything with too short of a barrel and a stock.
The Truth About Revolving Shotguns
In reality, the only two revolving shotguns ever declared to be destructive devices were the Street Sweeper and Armsel Striker. Admittedly they were the two only real revolving shotguns at the time. Cobray also produced the Ladies Home Companion. This was a .45-70/.410 handgun that was essentially a Street Sweeper scaled down to a much smaller caliber.
Since then, revolving shotguns haven’t really taken off. Taurus and Rossi produced the Circuit Judge, which was a .45 Colt/.410 revolving rifle. It had a rifled barrel, so it was technically a rifle. Which likely helps reinforce the myth that revolving shotguns are banned.
If ther shotguns were banned, you would think that any magazine-fed semi-auto shotgun would be banned. The USAS-12 was a magazine-fed, semi-auto shotgun, much like the Saiga-12, the MK1919, and various other designs you can purchase without dealing with the NFA.
Why Aren’t There More
If they aren’t banned, why don’t we see more revolving shotguns? Well, what’s the market for them? If you’ve ever handled a Street Sweeper or even a Striker, you can tell it’s not a very ergonomic gun. Twelve gauge shells are huge, and they have huge cylinders which require a winding mechanism or a long and very heavy double-action trigger pull. They are slow to reload and needlessly bulky.
It’s a pretty good sign when no military or police force ever adopts a certain type of weapon that it’s a fairly bad design. It would likely be expensive to make a nice revolving shotgun, and the demand is basically nonexistent. Nerds like me will want one, but not for Benelli or Beretta money.
I’m sure the actions of the 1990s had an effect on importers and manufacturers in the 1990s. In 2022 it isn’t likely to be the target of gun control scorn.
Without putting words in his mouth, my understanding is that this comment is born out of people’s tendency to view things through the lens of their own experience and use that to determine viability and validity, whether that be a technique, piece of equipment, or lifestyle choice.
This is going to be a short series on my observations of that saying’s applicability in various segments of the gun world.
I will preface this by saying that these articles are not intended as any sort of hit piece or critique of any specific individual, merely my observations having spent time in various segments of the defensive space, as well as seeing how some ideas are received by folks outside of the self defense community.
My hope is to help bridge some perceived communications gaps that result in people talking past one another, to facilitate the transfer of the best possible information in the easiest possible manner.
With that out of the way, let’s begin with the first installment.
INSTRUCTOR’S MICRO ISN’T EVERYBODY’S MACRO:
We all easily spend at least ⅓ of our lives at work. This number is dramatically higher for the self-employed, which most firearms instructors are. As such, it’s expected that an endeavor that consumes such a large portion of one’s life will color one’s outlook on what is “normal”, “acceptable”, and “expected”.
This is true of performance standards, equipment selection, and behaviors.
While normally well intentioned, when a good chunk of someone’s life revolves around firearms, the shooting sports, and martial arts, expectations equilibrate to that environment.
I mean, let’s be honest, in our circles if we go out to eat the odds are that the majority of the folks at the table will have at least one firearm on them. It’s like wearing a jersey to a fantasy draft; it’s so commonplace as to be almost expected.
The challenge lies with the fact that such a degree of familiarity and expectation will also inevitably color someone’s messaging.
The idea of being armed at all times is so obvious to most of us, and the prospect of intentionally going anywhere without a firearm can be so unfathomable that it can be expressed in ways that come across as derogatory towards those that don’t share the viewpoint.
Now I’m fortunate enough that the instructors with whom I associate have never intentionally derided anyone that has chosen to forego a firearm for whatever reason, however I have also spoken with people new to concealed carry that have expressed a perceived pressure to always carry their firearm with them.
I myself was one of those people. The peer-pressured expectation of “better to have it and not need it” led to me choosing to carry against company policy and subsequently losing a very lucrative career because of my choice.
Recently I was having a conversation with my wife and she commented how early in our relationship I let my firearm dictate where I would and wouldn’t go, and what I would and wouldn’t do. She hated it. Her exact words.
The obvious expectations also impact how people talk about performance standards. Pick your preferred pin/patch/coin standard. Many of them are tiered. Even the bottom-most level of those are still professional level standards. Anyone that has achieved something at that level absolutely deserves the accolades, however it’s important not to mock or diminish those who don’t, since many concealed carriers and first time gun owners are performing at a JV or Varsity level.
If professional level performance is treated as a cover charge for capability, it’s very easy for the subtext of that attitude to be “if you’re not performing at that level, then you’re not good enough to win your defensive encounter”, which I view as very problematic.
The training world is by its very nature occupied primarily with high drive, high performing individuals who don’t like being beaten, so they see someone outperforming them as motivation to improve. That, however, is not true for everyone. There are some people out there who will see a chasm of disparity between their current on demand performance and the high level shooting of someone claiming “you’re never good enough”, and that can be so daunting as to make the feat seem insurmountable.
Performance standards are a double edged blade. They give a relatively measurable objective benchmark, but they also provide a lot of fodder for othering and judgment.
The sub-second draw is a popular focus lately, and some people talk about it as if it must be met in order for someone to be taken seriously as a defensive shooter.
Ultimately I think that Pat McNamara’s perspective is most useful: The goal is that tomorrow’s version of you can kick yesterday’s version of you’s ass.
I really don’t care what someone’s draw to first effective hit time is. I don’t care if they’re faster than me or not. If they’re faster and more accurate than they were a day or a week or a month ago, that’s the important part. And it’s up to them to determine what level of performance they want to maintain.
John Daub has done a lot of great work on trying to quantify minimum performance standards.
Remember, just because it’s the minimum standard, doesn’t mean that it’s low. Delta, SEALs, and the FBIs HRT all have minimum standards.
Everyone needs to figure out what minimums are acceptable for their context and what is realistically maintainable, and we need to ensure that we’re not denigrating people who don’t make the pursuit of peak performance their life’s work.
The FG42 is one of those firearms I know exists but didn’t know much about. I knew it was a Nazi-designed and issued weapon intended for paratroopers and that it fired from a side-loading magazine. That’s it, and when I ran across a copy of Death From Above: The German FG42 Paratroop Rifle by Thomas B Dugelby and R Blake Stevens. Collectors Grade Publications published the book, and I walked away with a deep understanding of the weapon.
Death From Above is the complete book of the FG42. It’s about as close as I can get to learning the rifle’s history, its operation, and how to use it without getting my hands on an ultra-rare FG42. I flew through the book in a few days, and before we go deeper into the review, I wholeheartedly recommend it.
Death From Above – Information Overload
Death From Above breaks down absolutely everything about the FG42 from the beginning to the end of the weapon’s life span. Interestingly enough, after reading the book, I’m still confused about exactly what this weapon is classified as. It’s not quite an assault rifle, but also not a battle rifle.
As I read the book, I found myself fascinated by the weapon’s design and operation. You could argue it’s an infantry automatic rifle, much like the BAR, and that’s about as close as you can get to having the weapon assigned to a genre, if you will.
The book is a mix of a technical manual, a historical retrospective, and a great read. We learn about the origin of the rifle and why it was conceived, how the Battle of Crete convinced Hitler that paratroops were useless after their embarrassing performance.
That performance tied to the fact all they were armed with was 9mm pistols and SMGs, and their support weapons and rifles landed in crates too far to access. This convinced the Luftwaffe that they needed a paratroop-specific weapon. That weapon needed to be a rifle and a support fire weapon, but small enough to be attached to troops as they parachuted into combat zones.
From there, the book covers everything about the weapon. From its various models and development to its use and how it later influenced firearms design, it’s very in-depth.
Presentation
What’s drier than history books? Technical manuals! If you mix the two, you are looking at levels of well-done steak dry. However, the authors found a way to write the book in an easy-to-follow and entertaining way. Death From Above is not overly dry and not too technical.
You need to have a little understanding of firearms to get through the Death From Above. For example, if you don’t know the difference between a clip and a magazine, then the book might be confusing.
There are a few parts I gleaned over as I read. When they dived into an exhausting explanation of markings on the guns, I got a little bored. That’s not my jive, but if you are writing the exhaustive guide to FG42s, you have to include a little dry stuff. These drier parts are few and far between.
Highlights From Death From Above
I don’t necessarily want to spoil anything, but there are a few highlights of the book that deserve to be mentioned.
First, the photos are excellent overall. They include German photos and reference photos that are clear and easy to see. To supplement the photos, there are plenty of diagrams that show the different aspects of the FG42.
Second, the book has a manual on how to use the FG42 translated into English. I might never get my hands on one, but if I do, I have a reference for it.
One of my favorite short sections is the short tale about the 7.92 Kurz models. I never even knew those existed. This includes a humorous story of a United States soldier firing one for fun, and it didn’t go well. Well, it didn’t go well for a French horse.
Living History
I thought the FG42 was just another odd piece of German engineering. Little did I know the weapon had such a rich history and fascinating design. It’s a truly unique weapon that I have a much greater appreciation for due to Death From Above. Sadly, the book seems out of print, and you’ll have to keep your eye open to find a good deal on a copy.
A study worth reading. It is rare to get a raw and data rich study about firearm fatalities in the US, they are up from our low point in 2004 and are almost at the rates we had in the worst part of the 90’s. But where these deaths are occurring and why, an honest inquiry and not an aspersion to firearms ownership as a sin in itself, is rare in these studies. Hence the failure rate of studies during the RAND audit and the directly attributable response of politicos citing the worst studies to prop up their pet proposals.
The study overview goes,
Question How have firearm fatality rates varied over a 32-year period in the United States?
Findings In this cross-sectional study of 1,110,421 firearm fatalities, all-intent firearm fatality rates declined to a low in 2004, then increased 45.5% by 2021. Firearm homicides were highest among Black non-Hispanic males, and firearm suicide rates were highest among White non-Hispanic men ages 70 years and older.
Meaning This study found marked disparities in firearm fatality rates between men and women and by racial and ethnic group, and these disparities increased in recent years.
Importance Firearm fatality rates in the United States have reached a 28-year high. Describing the evolution of firearm fatality rates across intents, demographics, and geography over time may highlight high-risk groups and inform interventions for firearm injury prevention.
Objective To understand variations in rates of firearm fatalities stratified by intent, demographics, and geography in the US.
Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study analyzed firearm fatalities in the US from 1990 to 2021 using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Heat maps, maximum and mean fatality rate graphs, and choropleth maps of county-level rates were created to examine trends in firearm fatality rates by intent over time by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and urbanicity of individuals who died from firearms. Data were analyzed from December 2018 through September 2022.
Main Outcomes and Measures Rates of firearm fatalities by age, sex, race, ethnicity, urbanicity, and county of individuals killed stratified by specific intent (suicide or homicide) per 100,000 persons per year.
Results There were a total of 1,110,421 firearm fatalities from 1990 to 2021 (952,984 among males [85.8%] and 157,165 among females [14.2%]; 286,075 among Black non-Hispanic individuals [25.8%], 115,616 among Hispanic individuals [10.4%], and 672,132 among White non-Hispanic individuals [60.5%]). All-intents total firearm fatality rates per 100,000 persons declined to a low of 10.1 fatalities in 2004, then increased to 14.7 fatalities (45.5% increase) by 2021. From 2014 to 2021, male and female firearm homicide rates per 100,000 persons per year increased from 5.9 to 10.9 fatalities (84.7% increase) and 1.1 to 2.0 fatalities (87.0% increase), respectively. Firearm suicide rates were highest among White non-Hispanic men aged 80 to 84 years (up to 46.8 fatalities/100,000 persons in 2021). By 2021, maximum rates of firearm homicide were up to 22.5 times higher among Black non-Hispanic men (up to 141.8 fatalities/100,000 persons aged 20-24 years) and up to 3.6 times higher among Hispanic men (up to 22.8 fatalities/100,000 persons aged 20-24 years) compared with White non-Hispanic men (up to 6.3 fatalities/100,000 persons aged 30-34 years). Males had higher rates of suicide (14.1 fatalities vs 2.0 fatalities per 100,000 persons in 2021) and homicide (10.9 fatalities vs. 2.0 fatalities per 100,000 persons in 2021) compared with females. Metropolitan areas had higher homicide rates than nonmetropolitan areas (6.6 fatalities vs 4.8 fatalities per 100,000 persons in 2021). Firearm fatalities by county level increased over time, spreading from the West to the South. From 1999 to 2011 until 2014 to 2016, fatalities per 100,000 persons per year decreased from 10.6 to 10.5 fatalities in Western states and increased from 12.8 to 13.9 fatalities in Southern states.
Conclusions and Relevance This study found marked disparities in firearm fatality rates by demographic group, which increased over the past decade. These findings suggest that public health approaches to reduce firearm violence should consider underlying demographic and geographic trends and differences by intent.
HEAT Map breakdown of firearm homicides 1990-2021HEAT Map breakdown of firearm suicides 1990-2021
These are HEAT maps, separated by homicide victims and suicides, color code to show high instances as hot (red) and low instances as cool (blue) with green and yellow in between. If you’ve seen a map of a rain/thunder storm you can recognize the HEAT map. They are then run on 14 different filters, total, male, female, White (likely includes East Asian demos), Black, Hispanic, Male and Female by race, and the metropolitan and nonmetropolitan break downs. The axis of the maps are age (vertical) and year of instance (horizontal).
Homicide
The homicide map gives us a tremendous amount of data. We see the bloom in the 90’s with a cooler period in the 2000-10’s and a dramatic increase in the last couple years, starting 2020 (Shocking, I know).We then see the demographic and gender filters. We see the majority of deaths are male, starting in their mid-to-late teens and cooling off around the age of 40.
There were just over 69,000 female victims during this 32 year span, their are over 369,000 male victims. 210,818 of those males were non-Hispanic Blacks, with substantial flares in the 90’s window and the 2020-2021 window. White and Hispanic homicides were near parity in number, however the trends over time are very different. The homicides with White Male victims were fairly evenly distributed with a more gradual cool period in the 2000’s and more even age disbursement after the mid-teens. Hispanic homicides were very bad in 90’s but cooled substantially and stayed cooler to 2020 where a flare has been seen again. The two decades between 15 years of age and 35 account for the majorities in all demographics, White being the most evenly distributed outside that age range and Black and Hispanic heavily concentrated in that range.
Female trends followed the corresponding male with greatly reduced occurrences.
Urban areas have the majority of homicides as data given, but approximately 140,000 are unmarked between urban or rural locale.
Suicide
The greater share of mortality over the same time frame were suicides, 43% greater.
Suicides show an immediate inversion of homicide data in that, while they start at around the same age, they are heaviest among the older population. This immediate inversion in age is also joined by a disparity in demographics. While the male:female disparity remains steady at between 5 and 6 male deaths per female death, the male dead swing overwhelmingly white. White males are killing themselves between 7 and 8 to 1 over Black and Hispanic males combined. The older, the greater the risk of suicide in White males, Black males are at risk younger with a reduced risk for middle age and a slight increase as they get older.
Causes/Conclusions
Multifaceted and deeply ingrained.
We see dramatically different cultural attitudes towards killing one another, and killing oneself, across the various demographics filtered when it comes to violent use of a firearm.
This study found marked disparities in firearm fatality rates by demographic group, which increased over the past decade. These findings suggest that public health approaches to reduce firearm violence should consider underlying demographic and geographic trends and differences by intent.
This line is why we should take this information seriously. It didn’t say “Ban semi-autos or ‘high’ capacity magazines” it openly says this is a problem to be addressed within each of the problem segments. ‘Differences by intent’ make all the difference in the world.
It’s very clear that suicide, especially among the white male population, is seen more as acceptable and a solution to diminishing quality of life, a collection of failures and compounding stresses. Within the Black and Hispanic communities it is clearly more culturally taboo to kill themselves. Homicide, by contrast, is clearly seen as a social currency/social solution amongst the younger Black community, this then fades to closer to the societal averages after 35 years of age and dramatically closer after 55.
We must look at taking serious action to limit motivations for both homicide and suicide in the various regions and demographics they are most problematic. Curbing inner city violence motivated by criminal competitiveness will not be the same as reducing suicides by improving later life mental health treatment.
A ban is a terrible plan
A ban is a mindless, methodless, and ‘hammer square peg into anything but a square hole’ type of a proposed solution for curbing motives as there could possibly exist. But not everyone agrees on that point, despite plenty of evidence.
But let us say that we implement a ban. Let us then say the ban is so stringent that all semi-autos and high capacity magazines are removed from circulation, 100% efficacy and compliance. We’re back to revolvers and lever/bolt/pump guns. We shall additionally say for the sake of argument that the common firearm is limited to 8 rounds.
How many people could we save, potentially, in Chicago being limited to 8 shots?
HeyJackass.com
Potentially five people over three incidents. That terrible supposition assumes one would never reload and that the person who died was shot and killed after the 8th shot fired, also that every person was shot just once and thus shot at once. Meanwhile the number of incidents in range of every J-Frame and 5-shot shotgun, non-banned firearms, is in excess of 400 with around 150 killed. This ‘ban’ to do something about violence would maybe, maybe influence the outcome in about 1% of multiple victim shootings. Not prevent, not in the least, merely influence.
This highly improbable 1% improvement in imposing a limit on multiple victim shootings also supposes an environment of perfect compliance, which does not and has never existed. Even in an environment of 90% or greater compliance, that would leave millions in circulation and those among the most hostile to authority and the law already. Some would be among the otherwise law abiding perhaps, but many would be among those who are already the contributors to the high injury and death counts through currently illegal criminal mischief.
Now let’s talk about the ban actually being discussed, the one with grandfathering of current weapons and that will not remove the tens to hundreds of millions of weapons and hundreds of millions to billions of magazines, just tell everyone that you can’t buy, sell, or trade them anymore and hope for the best from the worst offenders.
A home invasion is top of the list on most people’s worst nightmares. Burglary is bad enough, but to qualify as a home invasion, the perpetrator is determined to have violent intent apart from the unlawful entry itself. Put briefly, they’re there to hurt you, not just take your stuff.
The Bureau of Justice statistics on police response times are not especially comforting. More than 60% of incidents of violence reported resulted in a wait of 6-60 minutes after calling 911. The details vary widely by city, time of day, volume of calls, and seriousness of the incident being reported, but even 6 minutes is a lifetime during a home invasion when someone is inside your house, looking to do you harm, and the only thing slowing them down is a fragile, hollow-core interior door.
One Texas mother unfortunately was forced to illustrate the value of armed self-defense last month, while she was on the phone with police, huddled with her children behind just such a bedroom door. Despite announcing that she was armed, and that the police were on the way, the intruder continued to try to force his way in to access the woman and her kids.
Finally, alone, with help still minutes away, and likely fearing for the lives of herself and her children, the woman fired once through the door, striking the intruder in the arm. A bullet was the only thing that stopped what could have been a deeply tragic home invasion, and the suspect was later arrested 100 yards from the home.
It’s something of a cliché, but it rings true nonetheless: When seconds count, police are minutes away. While it’s unlikely that most Americans will face determined violence in their daily lives, when it happens, the rescuer most likely to be available when you need it is you.
Ballot Measure 114 is now facing Firearms Policy Coalition, who has filed the second lawsuit aiming to take it out. The measure, which will be the law of the land after December 8, would ban magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds, and would require a permit to purchase for anyone wishing to express their enumerated 2nd Amendment right by purchasing or selling a firearm.
The mendicants that orchestrated measure 114, which won with a <2% margin, seem to have completely failed to make any sort of preparation for actually implementing the law. Under it, one must pass a firearms safety class with a live-fire section, then pay a fee to be granted a license to purchase a gun. Unfortunately not only is there is no enumerated class, there is not even a curriculum, funding (the program is estimated to cost $40,000,000/yr) instructors, or facilities in the state to make such a requirement accessible for all Oregonians, let alone marginalized groups who may not have money or transportation to go to such a class.
In a city of over 600,000, there are precisely 5 gun ranges. Even if there were classes and permits available immediately, the obvious bottleneck this would create puts this bill on shaky constitutional ground all by itself. Then we get in to the fact that the police they wanted to defund 2 years ago now being the arbiters of a constitutional right, and the magazine capacity restrictions. Given the original intent of the 2A was focused on producing an armed citizenry with access to military weapons, the idea that limiting magazine capacity to 10rd will stand up to the historical test required by the SCOTUS Bruen decision is laughable.
Between the total failure to plan ahead for this new law, its’ blatant unconstitutionality and obvious disregard for the rights of all OR citizens, not least of which the poorest among us, we are hopeful that the courts will do the right thing and put this whole debacle to bed.
Image above: Bill Wilson shooting one of his pistols. image credit: Wilson Combat
The Bill Drill: Six rounds into an IPSC A-Zone (6 inches by 11 inches on a metric target) or IDPA “Down 0” zone (eight inch diameter) starting from the holster at seven yards. It is a straightforward and simple drill and probably one of the most popular shooting exercises out there.
Rob Leatham, one of the most decorated pistol shooters in history, dubbed this exercise the Bill Drill after Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat who was an early pioneer of pistol action shooting sports at their dawn during the late 1970s and early 1980s.
WHY THE BILL DRILL MATTERS
The time it takes a person to shoot a clean Bill Drill can say a lot about their pistol shooting skills. Once again, the Bill Drill itself is an extremely simple and straightforward affair. After all, shooting a six inch by eleven inch A-zone target at 7 yards is not particularly hard. However, in order to clear this exercise at a high level, every aspect of shooting a handgun must be done decisively and with no wasted movement. It starts before the timer even goes off. How you stand. How your hand moves to your gun to draw; how the support hand joins the firing hand. How you squeeze down on your pistol and the moment you decide to break the first after deciding that your immediate sight picture is acceptable. How you use your arms and entire upper body to ensure that the slide tracks flat. And how you shoot to what your sight(s) tell(s) you until the gun locks back on the last round.
BILL DRILL TIME STANDARDS
While different instructors or organizations may have their own time standards with regards to the Bill Drill, a reasonable Bill Drill par time for most shooters is 3.5 seconds (and maybe four seconds for those who are new to working from a holster). Clearing the Bill Drill at two seconds or less is evidence of strong pistol shooting abilities, especially if done from concealment and not from a competition holster or equipment. According to Brian Enos, two seconds was also Bill Wilson’s original par time back in the day.
Arguably, the draw is the most critical part to getting a very competitive time. For example, a fast shooter who has a draw-to-first-shot-time of 1 second now has to shoot the remaining five shots with splits of at least 0.2 seconds or less to make that 2 second par time.
Rarely do I see something so silly that it just makes me stop in disbelief. I was cruising the world of Facebook when I ran across a post from one of my favorites follows, That Shotgun Blog. Hat Tip to that fine fella. Give him a follow for a lot of good information. He posted a screenshot from Midway USA showing a new load from Winchester Defender called Close Range. It’s a 20 gauge load, which I can get behind because there aren’t a ton of good 20 gauge defensive options. However, the Winchester Defender Close Range is one of the worst options you could ever trust for defensive use.
The Winchester Defender Close Range load is a number 2 load and not a number 2 buckshot. That’s right, a load from Winchester Defender is saying birdshot is a good choice for defensive use. My goal for the last year or so has been to stop people from using birdshot for home defense. This isn’t just my goal but the goal of many shotgun aficionados. I feel like all the work that’s been done has been undone by this new development.
Why Winchester Defender Close Range Is A Bad Idea
The Winchester Defender line has made some funky shotgun loads in the past. I admire their ability to be creative, even though the rounds they utilize aren’t often great. Sure, they made a .410 load that’s about the only worthwhile load in .410 handguns. They also made a buck and ball slug load that a good it dangerous for lawful self-defense. It can often go in either direction.
The Winchester Defender Close Range load is a step in the wrong direction. Unless you’re stuck in an Alfred Hitchcock movie, then birdshot is a terrible defensive choice. Lots of people like to parrot the saying, “It’s like a slug at close range!”
It’s not, and this Winchester Defender Close Range laid isn’t any better. It’s not a slug at close range. Birdshot is designed to kill flying animals with thin bones and not much meat. Humans have thick bones and often a fair bit of meat. The load of shot can’t penetrate deep enough to strike a vital organ and shut down the attacker.
But, but, but it’s Number 2 birdshot, a much heavier birdshot than most. That’s true, but let’s be clear, just because it’s good for the goose doesn’t mean it’s good for the gander. Number 2 birdshot is still birdshot and still sucks at penetrating.
On average, it penetrates 9.5 inches in ballistic gel. The FBI standard for penetration is 12 inches minimum. Anything less than 12 inches can’t reach the vitals necessary to shut down the attacker. You would be better served by a.22LR loaded with CCI Velocitors.
The Better Option
If you have a shotgun for home defense, then buckshot is the option. If you can’t handle buckshot or are worried about ‘muh overpenetration’ then swap firearms. Get an AR or other intermediate rifle platform. Or just learn to shoot.
Birdshot from a 20 gauge isn’t an option, and Winchester should be shamed and admonished for advertising a less effective option. Just say no to the Winchester Defender Close Range load. Winchester makes a Number 3 buckshot load for the 20 gauge. That would be better. Not perfect, but better. A low recoil 20 gauge round loaded with number 1 buckshot would be the best self-defense 20 gauge round, but I don’t think it exists.
Caleb starts this week’s episode off with a rant that he might have done before, and then he and Keith launch into tales from their times in retail firearms sales. Jack was killed by a big titty goth girl.
When you think of prohibition gangsters and their weapons, you likely get visions of 1911s, Thompsons, and various double-action revolvers. What about Lugers? Likely not, but ye olde Luger was a somewhat popular weapon with bootleggers and gangsters of the era. It doesn’t show up as much because they weren’t as common or as affordable. They tended to be more popular with bootleggers who had plenty of money to spare.
Lugers and their popularity in the United States are often overshadowed by other American-made firearms. While they may have never been as common as the American-made 1911, they had their fans. There was a joke that DWM imported half their overall production of Lugers to the United States.
After World War 1, Lugers became highly desirable and were often popular bring backs for troops returning from the Great War. This helped fuel their popularity in the states and gave them a standing market.
The Luger Appeal
In a world still mostly ruled by revolvers, the automatic pistol offered a smaller, lighter, and easier-to-conceal platform. They tended to be flatter and easier to pocket, something important to you if you were a criminal. The standard Luger magazine held eight rounds, and those 32-round snail drums were popular enough that at least two criminals carried them.
Jack “Legs” Diamond’s Luger
In the 1930s, 32 rounds in a handgun are absolutely absurd. It outperformed any other handgun from that period in terms of capacity. Lugers were also nine ounces lighter than the 1911, making them easier to pocket-carry.
Additionally, these guns were soft shooting. They were very easy to control and quite accurate. The M1911 isn’t a wrist breaker, but the Luger and its 9mm round are downright soft from an all-metal handgun. If you had to conceal a gun, the Luger seemed to be the right one in this era. Your other choices were 32s and 25s, which weren’t fight-stoppers by any means.
Criminals and Their Lugers
One of New York’s biggest celebrities and biggest bootleggers was a man named Jack ‘Legs’ Diamond. He was famous, reportedly very charming, and quite rich due to his bootlegging activities. Legs made as many enemies as he had friends and was a man who survived half a dozen assassination attempts.
He carried a good chunk of lead in his body and a Luger handgun. His Luger was in .30 Luger, and he is one of two known to have a 32-round snail drum. However, in December of 1931, his enemies finally got him. His Luger sold for nearly ten grand at auction somewhat recently.
The Purple Gang liked the Luger
If we go from New York to Detroit, we run into a group called the Purple Gang. The Purple Gang was a successful group of bootleggers who made buckets of money with booze. They were also violent hitmen, which would lead to their fall.
The police actively pursued the Purple Gang, and in April 1938, they got a tip regarding Purple Gang member Louis Fleisher. Police stormed his apartment and took out a pile of firearms. This included suppressors, a Mauser 96, a Colt Woodsman, a 1911, and two lugers.
One was your standard 4-inch barrel Luger pistol, and the other was a Luger with an 8-inch barrel that had been nickeled and wore a snail drum.
Jack “Legs” Diamond was a fan
A bootlegger named John Guida, who reportedly stood a mere 42 inches tall, reportedly reached for a Luger when two men murdered him. Guida’s last action was to reach for a Luger stored in a cigar case when Frank and William Carr gunned him down.
The Unconventional Bootlegger Blaster
Lugers are easily some of the most famed firearms in existence. In the states, they’ve mostly been. Known for being collectible. However, they were more than collector’s items and saw their way around both sides of the law.
The author found the P210C a slick shooting handgun.
A few years ago SIG brought back the SIG P210, a legendary 9mm pistol of epic statue. The P210A features important improvements over the original. Lockup is now the standard SIG type locking the barrel hood into the slide. The controls are Americanized with a Browning type magazine release and an extended safety in the proper location. The original SIG P210 safety is located in front of the triggerguard. The new pistol is stainless steel with a modern corrosion resistant coating. The SIG P210 is a single column magazine 9mm caliber handgun. Magazine capacity is eight rounds. The pistol is a good handling and shooting pistol. Reliability isn’t a question and you will have to look far and wide to locate a 9mm pistol as accurate as the P210A. And if you do chances are it will be a SIG. The P210A is a target type pistol by most definitions. How does it translate to a concealed carry handgun? Very well. The P210 Carry is a first class concealed carry handgun.
P210 Carry Pistol Specifications
Caliber: 9mm
Overall Length: 7.75 inches
Overall Height: 5.63 inches
Overall Width: 1.44 inches
Barrel Length: 4.1 inches
Sight Radius: 5.6 inches
Weight (w/magazine): 29 oz.
The P210C is a compact version of the SIGP210A. The primary difference is that the pistol is built with an aluminum frame and a shorter slide. The pistol features SIG X Ray three dot night sights and a low key black finish. The grips are G10 types with a good balance of adhesion and abrasion. The front strap is nicely checkered and even the front of the trigger guard is checkered. The trigger action breaks cleanly at a crisp 4.0 pounds even in my example. The pistol features a low bore axis setting low in the hand. This is largely due to the Petter inspired slide design. The slide is reversed from the usual format and rides inside the frame. The controls are positive in operation. Disassembly is simple enough and the pistol should be easy to maintain. It is predicable the pistol will be as reliable and long lived in service as the full size P210A. Lets look at the P210C’s performance.
As of this date I have fired the pistol with 620 mixed rounds including lead bullet handloads, full metal jacketed ammunition, jacketed hollow points, all copper sharp nose bullets, and +P loads. All have fed, chambered, fired and ejected normally. The pistol is smooth in operation but also tight very tight in slide to frame fit. The pistol has a natural point and heft I find refreshing. I carry a 1911 Commander .45 most of the time. I have the greatest respect for the CZ 75 and the Browning High Power. It is natural I use these handguns as a frame of reference. The P210C handles more quickly and more accurately than 9mm 1911 handguns I have tested. It seems to have an advantage that is less pronounced over the Springfield SA 35 while the High Power type pistol carries more ammunition. The CZ 75 D on hand for comparison isn’t as sure to a first shot hit due to its double action first shot trigger. In slow fire, however, the CZ 75 is very accurate- closer to the P210C than most handguns. The bottom line is that nothing in my gun safe or experience shoots as well as the P210C in overall accuracy in combat type shooting or absolute accuracy. Some are close but none quite equal the SIG.
In firing off hand the SIG P210 C is a joy to fire. Recoil is straight to the rear and the low bore axis results in little muzzle flip. The pistol is among the easiest of 9mm handguns to keep on target during a firing string. Most of the shooting with the pistol has been in off hand combat fire and bracing on different barricades, a truck bed, and from kneeling position. The pistol has never failed to deliver good combat accuracy. In firing from a solid braced firing position the pistol demonstrates excellent accuracy. I was able to secure several 2.0 inch groups at a long 25 yards with quality ammunition. On occasion when all went well with sight alignment, sight picture, and trigger press, I fired a 1.5 inch 25 yard group. This doesn’t have much to do with combat shooting but it demonstrates the fitting and quality of manufacture of the pistol. So we have a brilliantly accurate and easily controlled 9mm, light enough for constant carry, but without a high capacity magazine or light rail. That limits the audience and potential buyers. Just the same the P210C is as accurate a handgun as may be purchased over the counter and it offers steadfast reliability.
The SIGP210C is a handsome and useful handgun.The pistol was fired with a wide range of ammunition with good results.The pistol seemed to have an accuracy edge with full power service loads.This is a SIGP210A full size 9mm.SIG also offers full blown target model P210 handguns.Firing at reduced target, off hand, at 25 yards the author did pretty good. The pistol is very accurate.The author’s P210A has proven completely reliable.
The Smith and Wesson Model 14 revolver is one of the true classic members of the .38 Special K-frame family. These were known back in the day for their target match shooting performance out of the box. Typically, a Model 14 revolver has adjustable Patridge target sights and a six inch barrel. First unveiled in 1947, these guns quickly became a favorite of serious shooters during the golden age of the double action revolver, for both competitors and police officers. Besides the generous sight radius and crisp sight picture afforded by this revolver’s sights, it also balances quite nicely. Ever since I noticed how pleasant 148gr .38 Special wadcutters feel when shooting them from a Model 14, I started looking out for one to call my own. The overall pleasant experience, smoothness of the action and great accuracy with match .38 caliber ammunition led me to dub it the “Goldilocks Gun.”
Smith and Wesson’s “model number nomenclature” did not become a thing until the year 1957, so prior to that guns just had names like Military & Police, Registered Magnum, Target Masterpiece, Combat Masterpiece, etc. The Model 14 in particular was known as the K-38 Target Masterpiece. While nowadays a six inch barrel on a revolver might be seen as too long and not the first choice, the majority of target revolvers of yesteryear were built with such barrel lengths in mind. Besides these longer barrels, the Model 14 had adjustable target sights which might as well have been the mounted dot sight equivalent of their day, especially if one compares the rudimentary sights found on basic service or general purpose revolvers back then. More basic guns had a rear sight that milled through the revolver’s topstrap and the front sight was just a rudimentary blade fixed in place. On the other hand, the Model 14 specifically had Patridge sights. E. E. Patridge came up with his design in the late 1890s and these quickly became the go-to for accuracy oriented target pistols. A thick front sight blade lines up evenly in front of a square notch while still allowing some light on either side of the front blade. The sight picture this arrangement provides is ideal for a 6 o’clock hold when shooting bullseye targets.
Detail of the thick Patridge front sight blade along with the adjustable rear sight and a full length serrated flat top. This was a feature often found on target semi autos and revolvers to reduce glare. Note the wide target hammer as well.
THE MODEL 14 IN MATCHES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
Jack Weaver shooting his Model 14 revolver using the stance he become famous for developing.
The Model 14 was nearly perfect for bullseye and PPC (Police Pistol Combat Competition) out of the box. Prior to the popularity of action pistol sports like IPSC or IDPA, old school serious shooters participated in these types of shooting events. Accuracy in either of these disciplines was paramount, and matches were often determined by the number of “X-ring” tie breaker hits. Naturally it follows that these older games would require more accuracy. As most revolvers held only six cartridges it was important both in sport and combat that all six rounds had to count. Famous pistol shooter, Jack Weaver (inventor of the Weaver stance) used to shoot with a Model 14. His skill level was such that he had no problem competing against shooters with single action 1911s.
Like these archaic handgun games, police shooting tactics then placed a heavier focus on accuracy and standards were more stringent then than they are today. According to Darryl Bolke of HiTS, shooting scores and critical accuracy were held in extremely high regard by police culture of the era, and many departments and agencies already had decades using six inch barreled target revolvers as duty weapons. It comes with no surprise that the Model 14 revolver was an approved pistol that was extensively used by the Los Angeles Police Department during this time period. Officers were originally issued the perennial 158gr LRN standard .38 Special loads. Typically officers carried a fully loaded cylinder and 12 additional cartridges in some drop pouches with the addition of perhaps a back up snub nosed revolver as well. That is a total of 18-23 rounds on board. Every shot had to count. Revolvers like the Model 14 were carried in very old school break open clamshell holsters. These archaic holsters split open from the front in order to make it easier to draw a revolver with a [relatively long] barrel efficiently.
A Model 14 Revolver at the LAPD Museum in Los Angeles, California. The gun sits on an opened clamshell holster along with the period Sam Browne rig. An Ithaca Model 37 shotgun barrel is also in view.
The Smith and Wesson Model 14 was also prominently featured in the popular LAPD TV show, Adam-12 during its first few seasons until the LAPD started transitioning from the Model 14 to the Smith and Wesson Model 15 revolver during the early 1970s. (The TV switched accordingly to remain consistent with this detail as well). In the 1988 film Colors Sean Penn’s character officer Danny McGavin notably carries a Model 14 as his main duty sidearm as well.
Screen grab from Adam-12. Officer Malloy is unloading his Smith and Wesson Model 14 revolver. The old school drop pouches that held 12 additional loose cartridges are visible in this photo in addition to the customized Fuzzy Farrant stocks on the revolver. image credit: IMFDB.org
THE MODEL 14 LEGACY
The Smith and Wesson Model 14 revolver became relevant in American gun culture during what was arguably the zenith or the golden age of the double action revolver. Offering police officers and competitors everything they needed out of the box to shoot well, it was also revered as such. Though the sun has set on the service revolver as a primary duty weapon, firearms such as the Smith and Wesson Model 14 continue to bring some utility, pleasure and appreciation for the old ways to modern shooters. Whether it is Smith and Wesson or Colt or any other revolver manufacturer who has been present for generations, often times people remark something along the lines of “they don’t make them like they used to.” This is undoubtedly true, especially for products that have been around for over a century. The Model 14 is a product of an era when gunsmiths worked over and fitted normal factory guns before being shipped out—something that is now economically unfeasible due to the time, money, and skill required to do so. Manufacturing techniques have evolved, in many ways for the better, but these old guns will always retain that “soul.” To understand where one currently is and where they are heading in the future, one must not forget what came before them.
If you said Colt didn’t have much imagination, I’d have to agree. They are still clinging to the 1911. Admittedly they seemingly failed every time they tried to do something different. Why they aren’t exactly imaginative in the guns they produce, they do have some interesting prototypes that never got made. For example, the confusingly named Colt GX-3181. The GX-3181 is a prototype pistol designed as a retro refit of the Colt 1908 Vest Pocket pistol.
To really understand this gun, we have to understand the Colt 1908 Vest Pocket. The Vest Pocket was a John Browning design. As the name implies, it’s a pocket pistol. It’s only 4.5 inches long, with a 2-inch barrel. It weighed only 13 ounces and was chambered in the anemic 25 ACP round. This was a striker-fired pistol that used a straight blowback operation. ‘Tiny’ best describes the gun.
The weapon featured a set of fixed sights which were incredibly small but designed to be snag-free. They are actual sights, but Colt carved a trench into the slide to allow them to sit flush with the slide and be rather snag-free. It’s a smart design. The 1908 Vest Pocket was a popular pistol, and nearly half a million were produced. They were even fielded by the OSS and SOE during World War 2.
The Colt GX-3181 – Revamping the Colt 1908 Vest Pocket
By the mid-1940s, the Vest Pocket was out of production. Sales likely slowed due to the gun’s age and the advent of similar, more modern weapons. Colt still wanted a piece of that small, concealable pistol market. Cheap European pistols flooded the market, and Colt was being priced out. They looked at the Vest Pocket and pondered what they could do to improve the design.
They came up with a few options to make the pistol more modern and appealing. I imagine the anime 1908 Vest Pocket pistol made it a little less prevalent after World War 2. People were looking towards the future and the atomic age. The wearing of vests was likely less common, and who wanted a gun from 1908?
The Colt GX-3181 ditched the wood grips and replaced them with a polymer-type material with a bit of a swell to them. It likely filled the hand better, making the gun a little wider and easier to shoot. Say bye to the grip safety because it was gone. The frame-mounted safety had a slight redesign that allowed it to be a bit bigger and flow into the slide easier.
The heel-mounted magazine release was enlarged and likely much easier to work with. The slide was slightly reduced, exposing some of the barrel. To cut weight, the frame was made from aluminum. Also, interestingly enough, the prototype produced was in .22LR instead of 25 ACP. This might have been for prototyping means, but it also might have been because 25 ACP was going out of style.
The sights remained small and kept the odd, low profile, trench-type design. It appeared to be a very handy little pistol. Perfect for the pocket and handy for concealed carry. So, where is my overpriced Colt GX-3181 listing on Gunbroker?
The Fate of the Little Fella
Colt prototyped the weapon and tested it, but it went nowhere. Sadly Colt ditched the idea but still wanted a mini pocket pistol. They decided to import a weapon from Spain, specifically Astra. Colt imported the Astra Cub and renamed it the Colt Junior. It was a 25 ACP pocket pistol that was cheaper to import than it would be to produce the GX-3181.
Sadly, economics got in the way of production, and Colt ditched the plan.
