The claims about AR-15 lethality and efficacy are farcical in most instances. Anyone familiar enough with the topic to speak on it can’t make the fantastic headline and meme generating claims that are tossed back and forth by rule makers.
Why would we want rulemakers over little life and death topics like prison sentences to have a basic understanding of what they’re commenting on, afterall.
Anywho, one the more mockworthy comments to emerge recently was a claim on the devastating nature of exit wounds and crushing energy that the AR-15’s and 5.56 rifles deliver. Basically describing it like the AR is launching sledge hammers through people.
So Mike tests that theory and well… it’s not like that at all.
More like a rifle that is chambered in an intermediate caliber. Still dangerous to get shot with certainly, but not footwide exit wounds. It isn’t removing giant chunks of your flesh and leaving them on the floor. That’s a shotgun at close range with buckshot.
The British SOE helped develop a number of weapons for the British War effort during World War 2. This includes numerous submachine guns. One such gun is the Norm gun. The Norm gun was an interesting design all around, but it never made it past the prototype stage. Part of the Norm gun’s interesting design was the placement of a horizontal grip near the muzzle, and today I wanted to see if this odd setup has any merit.
What’s the Norm Gun
The Norm Gun was a 9mm, open bolt, blowback operated SMG. The gun fed from a magazine and used an interesting bolt setup. Instead of a bolt with a dust cover like every other SMG at the time, the gun used what is best described as a big pistol slide. The user retracted the slide to ready the gun. This created an ambidextrous design but also exposed the internals to the grit and grime of the world.
The gun was designed by a BSA engineer named Eric Norman, for who it is named after. The gun featured a forward grip on the right-hand side of the gun. The idea was the user placed their hand under the barrel and over to the right side to grip the gun. There isn’t a ton of info on why this was done. I’ve run into passing comments from historical sources saying it was effective but not elaborating on why.
I think because most guns will recoil upward and right for a right-handed shooter. Placing a grip on this side could keep the gun from recoiling upward and to the right.
Today I’ve decided to figure it out.
My Stand-In Norm Gun
Sadly, I don’t have a Norm gun, but I have an Aero EPC in 9mm. It’s a PCC and not an SMG, but it does shoot 9mm and uses a direct blowback design. It’s a full-length AR15 upper build kit, and while I have braced pistols that are more or less the same size as the Norm gun, I’m not sure how the ATF feels about side-mounted grips.
I know they dislike vertical grips, so I figure it’s not worth the risk. For the experiment, I set up an Ergo grip on the side as close to the muzzle as I could. I mounted it to a rail and then to the gun, but Ergo have an M-LOK direct model. It’s one of the better accessories out there. I also placed a Mantis X10 device to measure recoil and muzzle rise and measure the difference with the Norm gun style grip.
To The Range
I used standard 115-grain FMJs and shot both traditionally and with the Norm Grip gun using the Mantis to measure muzzle rise. I started with a standard grip to get a baseline and fire five rounds slowly. Between shots, I examined the Mantis and took note. Next, I fired five rounds rapidly using a standard grip.
Next, I assumed the Norm Gun grip and fired five rounds slowly, followed by five rounds fired rapidly to see if I could feel a difference. I can’t say I felt much of a difference. The biggest difference in using this style of grip was the awkward nature of it.
The Mantis doesn’t lie, and there was no major difference between using a standard grip and the Norm Gun technique. Maybe this technique worked well with full auto fire from the hip. The assault position was a thing, and that encouraged firing from the hip.
Standard grip
I didn’t have any kind of hope I would rediscover some crazy forgotten technique for recoil control. However, it was still a fun experiment. I’d love to try this with a real SMG, but I think since the Norm Gun is the only gun to ever feature, this style of grip might be telling enough.
Norm Grip
Sadly, this odd placement of grip didn’t do much beyond making the gun extremely awkward. Stay tuned because this has me looking for more weird weapon setups and experiments from the past to take to the range.
We all love the M16 and have a mostly general disdain for the M14, but what about the middle child? Did the military ever field and adopt an M15? The answer is yes, an M15 exists. As a fellow middle child, I can most certainly relate to the feeling of being ignored and pushed to the side. While everyone shouts about the M14 and the M16 from the rooftops, the poor M15 sits long forgotten.
The M15 was a 1950s project that was developed around the same time as the M14. Predictably the M14 came first. The intent of the M14 was to create one rifle to fill the role of the BAR, the M1 Garand, and the Thompson. That’s a lot of different guns to replace, and the Army quickly figured out you really couldn’t do that.
They began to develop the M15 as a replacement for the BAR. The BAR provided fire team support and suppressive fire to allow the units the move. WW2 showed the value of fire and maneuver tactics and that the average squad needed automatic firepower. Thus, they needed a squad automatic. We were a few decades away from the M249 SAW. With the M14 already developed they turned to their latest creation to replace the BAR.
The M15 – A Squad Automatic Rifle
The USMC adopted an Infantry Automatic Rifle rather recently, but the concept of a rifle in the fire support role obviously isn’t new. The Army and Marine Corps developed the M15 as a heavy version of the BAR. The M14 was selective fire, and so was the M15.
Development of the M15 essentially saw the military converting the M14 into a BAR. Although the M15 would be significantly lighter. The M15 would weigh 13.5 pounds, and the M1918A2 weighed 19 pounds. Six pounds was a nice reduction in weight.
Development saw the addition of a heavy barrel to help with increased heat and to maintain sustained fire. The stock was strengthened significantly to eat up the recoil of the 7.62 NATO in full auto. A bipod was added to help with stability, and a hinged butt plate was added to help keep the rifle locked in the shoulder. They experimented with a rate reducer, but they found that the rate reducer did not affect accuracy, so it was eliminated.
The work was completed in 1954, and the firearm was known as the T44E5 model. By 1957 the weapon was adopted, but by 1959 the weapon had been discontinued. The M15 was less successful than the M14, and that’s impressive.
Enter The M14E2 /M14A1
The M15 worked, but after some experimenting, both the Army and Marine Corps found that the M14 with a bipod was just as good as the M15. This caused the military to abandon the M15 and its heavy barrel. In its place, they developed the M14E2.
The M14E2 became the M14A1 and was a radical departure from the M14. The gun wore a wood stock, but the weapon used a rear vertical pistol grip and a folding forward grip for greater stability. Like the M15, the gun got a bipod and a hinged stock. Across the top, a polymer handguard helped keep things cool during full auto fire.
The M14A1 still had some serious problems as a squad support weapon. It was difficult to control, and while improved compared to the M14, the M14A1 was still a rough ride. The BAR had six more pounds on the gun, and that helped eat up recoil. Additionally, the BAR had a slower firing rate and was more controllable. The M14A1 spit 750 rounds per minute and was a bucking bronco.
This killed the idea of the M14 and M15 in use as an automatic rifle. The M60 was the general-purpose machine gun of the era. In the midst of Vietnam, the full auto M16 became an ad-hoc squad support weapon. Later, while waiting for the M249 the USMC even produced bipod-equipped M16s to play a familiar role.
So there was an M15, but it never got its chance to shine.
The Biden Administration and the Democrat controlled congress have made a great amount of noise about their progress to stop illicit firearms, especially GHOST GUNS!!!
These babayaga of the anti-gun culture war are merely firearms without number on the side, and their number one producer, in the handgun space especially, was Polymer80.
Polymer80 is of course crushed and their “evil” ways of arming the unwashed masses are no more, right?
Right?
Polymer80 Product Changes in Accordance with ATF Final Rule
Last week ATF final rule 2021R-05F, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms, went into effect. Polymer80, Inc., the company that designs and develops innovative firearms and after-market accessories that provide ways for customers to participate in the build process while expressing their right to bear arms, is a direct target of this new rule. Polymer80 wholeheartedly disagrees with the ATF final rule, however, in an effort to maintain a legal business, will comply with the unconstitutional regulations.
In accordance with the new ATF final rule, Polymer80 will no longer offer their popular 80% kits in the same configuration in which customers have grown accustom. Instead, Polymer80 has released three new options for consumers interested in building their own legal firearm:
OPTION 1: is an unserialized 80% frame with rear rail, locking block rail system and pins. No jig or tools are included with this product. OPTION 2: is a serialized frame that does include a jig, tooling, rear rail and locking block rail system. This option is the same as the prior 80% kit offered by Polyer80, but with a serialized frame. OPTION 3: is the “Build Back Better” kit, which includes everything listed in option 2 plus a slide assembly. This kit contains everything you need to build a complete, serialized firearm.
Well, it seems like they aren’t taking the frame rule on the chin and doing nothing. They are rolling with it and playing the ‘technically correct is the best kind of correct’ card.
Option 1, the unserialized 80% blank, is currently available for purchase at www.polymer80.com. Please note that shipment is not available to all states.
For those interested in assembling without drilling, Polymer80 will continue to offer their AFT “Assemble for Thyself” kit, which includes all the necessary components to build a complete firearm, no drilling required.
Polymer80 will also continue to offer their line of complete pistols, including the popular PFC9 compact pistol and PFS9 full-size pistol, as well as parts and accessories.
I don’t know if Polymer80’s selling serialized firearm kits that have to be NICS’d while also selling unserialized frames that could ostensibly be put into the tools and directions included with the serialized kit is going to fly. But I believe it is, at present, technically correct to the ATF’s rules regarding suppliers of firearm parts.
What the ATF wants is to limit available methods, tools, and directions from easy access and supply. You, an end user, are allowed to build an unserialized firearm but a supplier cannot sell you all the parts, mostly assembled, ready to throw together, with the tools and directions to complete the last little steps required. That combination of factors now constitutes them selling a firearm and it needs to be serialized and transferred via FFL. It’s among the vaguest of vague lines and relies entirely on wink and nod technicalities to function, but that is the rule.
— Toronto Police Service Guns Seized #offthestreets (@TPSGunsSeized) August 22, 2022
Perhaps the only thing that’s more absurd than gun buybacks is the numerous local police “Crap we found this week” social media posts. Many departments have taken to posting the products of their latest bust on Twitter or Facebook, and while it’s important that police, well, police, the things they choose to highlight as trophies can get ridiculous. Toronto Police Service’s social media department has got to be the champ of this game though, and the picture above is just the beginning.
Ignoring the obvious age of this revolver, gleaned from the only part of its original surface one can discern, given the volume of rust/corrosion/dead barnacles that appear to have encrusted it over the decades, who was this threatening? This is at best a paperweight, or possibly a blunt instrument. We realize that guns are a big deal to our neighbors in the Great White North, but only the ATF (and apparently TPS) would consider this a firearm anymore. We’re sure John Dillinger is relieved to know this gun is off the streets.
Another, not quite so antique, but equally questionably functional find. I’m sure this was a great gun sometime around the release of the original Red Dawn, before it wound up in someone’s prison pocket for the duration of the GWOT.
Look how they massacred my boy!
This one… probably works? It might be just as crusty as the others, but with all the tactical electrical tape, it’s hard to say.
Lastly, this is a favorite. Too new to be a relic of Benedict Arnold, too old to be legally considered a firearm by the ATF. To be fair, they have taken some legitimate, functional, modern firearms off the streets but what does it tell you about strict gun control, if you’re constantly catching criminals with guns? We would consider that a clue, but alas, we aren’t the detectives here.
Oh boy, do I love weird guns. Two genres of firearms that often attract the weird are shotguns and revolvers. Today we will be focusing on the revolvers and not the shotguns, although there are a number of revolving shotguns that could make for a great crossover. Throughout history, there have been some weird revolvers, but I want to focus on the weird revolvers of the modern era. (Although the history buffs may get their own weird revolver article soon enough.)
Korth Sky Marshal
Korth is known for making their guns unobtanium and extremely expensive, and the Sky Marshal and later Sky Hawk series are more affordable at only about a thousand dollars. These 9mm revolvers are best classified as snub noses with 2-inch barrels, although a ridiculous-looking 3-inch model existed.
The first oddity about these guns was the caliber. These were 9mm revolvers which are uncommon but not all that unheard of. Korth did develop a system with the cylinder to avoid the use of moon clips, which I can appreciate.
Courtesy American Rifleman
This is also not completely novel, but still an oddity. What was a cool idea was the fact they didn’t just use a .38 Special cylinder. They tailored the cylinder length for the shorter 9mm.
Another oddity was the placement of a small section of rail on the side of the barrel. This is an odd place to put a light, but it is really the only way to fit a rail on a snub nose revolver. Odd, but I can’t hate it. In fact, of all the guns on this list, this would likely be the one I’d purchase.
OTs-38
Let’s go to Russia for this one. In fact, the whole list could be weird Russian revolvers. The OTs-38 might be the most bizarre. This is an integrally silenced revolver. Not silenced like the Mosin revolver with a gas seal, but suppressed via the ammunition it uses. The 7.62x41mm SP-4 cartridge uses a captive piston inside the cartridge.
When fired, the gun propels the piston, which propels the projectile. The explosion is contained inside the cylinder and cartridge, thus rendering it effectively suppressed.
I’m proud to say America created this design with the QSPR revolver in Vietnam. These weird revolvers have some other oddities worth mentioning.
The OTs-38 uses a right-side opening cylinder. There is a manual safety catch that allows the user to carry the revolver with the hammer cocked but the safety on. Much like the Chiappa Rhino, the barrel aligns with the bottom cylinder of the revolver and at the top is a laser sight for aiming the weapon. I can only imagine the number of dissidents killed with this thing.
Mateba Model 6 Unica
The Model 6 Unica is one of my grail guns. I’ve wanted one since I watched Ghost in the Shell as a kid. This gun is affectionately known as the Autorevolver. It’s a semi-automatic revolver. The gun’s first shot is in double action, then a portion of the gun slides rearward.
This rearward motion cocks the hammer and rotates the cylinder making it a semi-auto revolver. This wasn’t the first semi-auto revolver but is the most famous.
It’s an Italian design, and it resembles the Rhino because the same engineer worked on both guns. Like the Rhino, the Mateba fires from the bottom cylinder.
Interestingly enough, if the gun fails to cycle, it can still be used with another double action trigger pull. It’s recoil-operated, so it can be ammo sensitive. A .357 Magnum can chamber .38 Special, but .38 would often fail to make the weapon completely cycle and render it functioning like a traditional revolver.
MP-412 Rex
Another Russian revolver is on the list. It’s a bit more practical but clearly one of our weird revolvers. The MP-412 Rex was designed for import, but due to an agreement between Clinton and Yeltsin, the importation of Russian firearms ceased around the time of this gun’s production. The Rex looks fairly practical and is a DA/SA, .357 Revolver that looks fairly modern.
In the early 1990s, the MP-412 Rex was fairly innovative in its use of polymer. Russia used a steel reinforced polymer grip frame. It would be decades later that Ruger would produce the LCR with a healthy dose of polymer. This was a full-sized revolver with what appears to be a 4-inch barrel and an exposed hammer.
The real weird part of the Rex was how you loaded and ejected the empty cases. Instead of a swing-out cylinder, the Rex used a break-open design much like the famed Schofield revolvers. The gun featured automatic ejection, and the cases would fly from the gun, which theoretically makes reloads a fair bit faster. It’s a real shame we didn’t get the gun imported into the states.
MDL 38-3
Century Arms announced the MDL 38-3 a few years back and promised that it would be the thinnest .38 Special revolver ever produced. They brought it to SHOT Show, showed it off, but then the gun never came to be. It’s somewhat unclear if these were imports or Century’s own creation. Sadly, the little gun never came to the market.
I’d buy one just for the novelty. How did Century make the revolver less than an inch thick? Well, they reduced the chamber to three rounds only.
Courtesy of TTAG
This produced a very flat revolver. The barrel was a standard snub nose, and so was the grip.
If there is one feature a lot of these weird revolvers share, it’s firing from the bottom cylinder, and that was present here as well. The MDL 38-3 might not have been the most practical wheelgun, but it’s a unique one I wish I could get my hands on.
The Weird Guns Of A Big World
Revolvers have a lot of room to be weird, and weird can be good. Sadly weird isn’t always profitable and is often expensive. Even so, I’d really love any of the guns on this list, especially a Unica. Unica might as well be Unicorn. Maybe I’ll have to settle for a Sky Marshal instead.
Facebook “memories” has a terrible way of making me feel old. Just the other week it showed me that it has been ten years since I was first introduced to the semi-auto shotgun. 12 gauge semi-auto Mossberg JM specifically – taught to me by the actual JM himself. I know, I know, but it was the group I was training with, not me that was special.
This was a Babes With Bullets camp specifically for learning 3-Gun. By that point I had been doing pistol IDPA competition for a few years with my Gen 3 Glock19, and I had purchased an S&W M&P15TS for my rifle. But I didn’t yet have my own shotgun, and hadn’t really shot one either. But I wanted to try 3-Gun, and Babes Camp with Head Instructor Kay Miculek had the JM’s as loaners to try, so that’s what I did.
If you haven’t had the pleasure of meeting Kay Miculek in the flesh, well that is your loss. A more talented shooter, skilled instructor, and gracious woman has never walked the earth. I’ve lost track of how much instruction I’ve had from Kay over the years through various Babes Camps, but each session was a pleasure and an education.
From the Outdoor Channel
The Camp was held in Iowa at the Brownell’s facility, which was absolutely wonderful. But that meant that I roadtripped all by myself all the way to Iowa – an 800 mile solo journey one way – including through thoroughly gun unfriendly Illinois. Up to that point I had never driven that far solo, let alone across state lines with firearms and ammunition on board, so that in itself was an adventure. Yeah I know, whatever – get off my lawn. It was a big deal for ME.
It so happens that camp that session was also staffed by Lena Miculek and Jerry Miculek. The Miculeks being – well – the Miculeks, there were sponsor guns available to shoot so that those of us without our own could “Try before you buy”.
Thus it was that I ended up being coached on the 12 gauge shotgun – using a Mossberg JM – by the actual JM himself, Jerry Miculek. It is a fine measure of great and talented people who can lower themselves to instruct rank beginners. And I was the rankest of the rank.
The Great coaching the Lowly.
I won’t go into too much detail, but watching me fumble and drop shell after shell while struggling to learn weak hand reloading had to be painful. This was also the era BEFORE the over-the-shoulder-load-four-at-a-time technique that 3-gunners use nowadays. Amazing how techniques evolve over time. In only ten years it’s a completely different ballgame. One which I sadly no longer play. One should know one’s limitations and after a few years I learned mine.
Made it onto Brownell’s FB page.
But this camp and this 12 gauge instruction gave me the basic skills and knowledge upon which to base my own future shotgun purchases. Ten years later I now own two Benellis and two pawnshop Mossbergs, which I have used in 3-Gun, Turkey hunting, Duck hunting, Clays shooting, Upland hunting and a self defense class. All of which was totally worth a midlife 800 mile roadtrip to learn from legends.
I’m not a big suppressor head, but I appreciate their performance. A friend of mine loves cans and suppressed rounds. He hand loads and tinkers to make the most effective suppressed goodies, and recently, he’s been raving about the 8.6 Blackout, and that’s led me to ask, what the hell is the 8.6 Blackout?
The projectile size is already weird. To me, anything in metric above 7.62 defies my American thirty cal mindset. It reeks of Europeanness and never being on the moon. Yet, as I came to find out, it’s an all-American round. So what is it?
The Noveske 8.6 Pushes Things Further
Well, there are clearly some hints in the name. Blackout, like 300 Blackout, likely means it’s designed to be suppressed, and the use of an 8.6mm projectile likely means it’s a big, heavy, subsonic projectile. That being said, what’s in a name? This round has also been referred to as the 8.6 Creedmoor and the 8.6 BLK. Although, if my friend is any metric, the name 8.6 Blackout seems to be the most popular nom de guerre.
Inside the 8.6 Blackout
Whenever something new comes up in the world of suppressed goodies, it’s not much of a surprise to see Kevin Brittingham of Q behind it. The guy has likely innovated in the suppressor world as much as Maxim did. He’s helped create ammo, suppressors, and even weapons designed to be designed.
He is the mind behind the 8.6 Blackout, and he partnered with Hornady to make it so. 8.6 is the metric means of saying .338. They took a .338-sized projectile and shoved it into a 6.5 Creedmoor case. Kind of. They had to trim the case and neck it up first.
Using the 6.5 Creedmoor case does a few things. It keeps the length right, so the ammo works in .308 magazines. It also allows you to retain the .308 bolt face, which will make building rifles for the design a bit easier than something new or proprietary.
Suppressing the 8.6 Blackout
The design offers you the versatility of both supersonic and subsonic loadings. The supersonic loads are a ‘light’ load in the 150 to 160-grain field. The heavier subsonic projectiles get up to 300 grains. Supersonic rounds offer more range, but they retain the supersonic crack. The benefit of a subsonic load is the elimination of that telltale crack at the cost of max effective range.
The Fix is 8.6 Blackout ready
The subsonic rounds are effective in killing an animal out to 300 yards. That’s fairly impressive for a subsonic cartridge. The report would be around the same as a .22 suppressed, at least that’s what people in the know state.
These big, long, and heavy bullets aren’t designed for a 24 or even 20-inch barrel. The 8.6 Blackout is designed around a nice, short, 12.5-inch barrel. Short barrels rule in general, and more importantly, they allow the mounting of a suppressor without making the weapon overly long.
In Real Life
So, what the hell is the 8.6 Blackout? Well, it’s like the .300 Blackout for full-power rifles. The 8.6 Blackout is to the .308, as the 300 Blackout is to the 5.56. The round has already seen some solid support, with Hornady producing ammo, Q obviously producing rifles like the Fix, and Noveske and Faxon both offering support for the round.
Courtesy Kit Badger
Will the 8.6 become as popular as the .300 Blackout? I can’t possibly say, but I sure hope so. It seems like an awesome idea, and as a hunter, it certainly strikes me as a capable round for my preferred hunting ranges. Hopefully, we can get hands-on with an 8.6 Blackout sooner than later.
Have you thanked a competition shooter lately? You should, because they’re the reason your carry gun has a red dot sight on it.
The competition world of firearms has been an avenue for pressure testing shooting efficiencies for a long time. Accuracy, durability, off/odd angle, use around objects, variable range, all have a discipline where the gear and shooter efficiencies can be tried and evalutated.
Now not everything in the competitive world makes it to the tactical, but there is usually a variant that does if it works in the competition world. Hand gun red dots are an excellent example. LPVOs are another. Although Delta had the short dot developed, one of the major factors that drove them further into the operational sphere was their use in 2-gun and 3-gun. The Razor II’s with the JM-1 reticle are competition built optics the migrated to combat, not the other direction.
I’ve always thought the best way to judge the state of an optic is to look at the cheapest variant on the market. Recently I decided to purchase the cheapest red dot on Amazon and see how it holds up to several different tests. I did set some rules. My cheapest red dot needed to be designed specifically for guns, real guns. If the dot was advertised for air guns or BB guns of any kind, it got a pass. This took a lot of looking and clicking and reading descriptions.
Eventually, I found the cheapest red dot designed for actual firearms for a whole 19 dollars. The X-Vision Optics Micro HIIT Red Dot Sight. What does HIIT stand for? I have no earthly idea. Who is X-Visions? I have no idea. I do know it cost me 19 bucks and I hit buy it now and patiently waited for my two-day shipping to kick in.
Unboxing the Cheapest Red Dot
I was pleasantly surprised when I unboxed the optic. With the optic, you get a tiny flat head driver for making adjustments. A wheel that lists the adjustments mounts to the screwdriver, so you know how to make your adjustments. The optic comes mounted to a Picatinny rail mount and can be detached. The footprint is not listed and might be proprietary but resembles the Docter/Noblex design.
The battery is bottom mounted, and there is a metal shroud that wraps around the entire optic for another level of protection. This is a 6061 hood. There are no buttons, and it’s an auto-adjusting design. Since the dot has no settings to turn it ‘off,’ you toss a hood on it. Not too big of a surprise with the cheapest red dot on the market. The X-Vision HIIT is firmly attached to the Picatinny mount. Overall the optic looks cheap, but not as cheap as I expected.
The mount allows the optic to sit high enough to absolutely co-witness with AR height sights. The battery is a CR2032 battery, and the dot is 3 MOA in size.
Mounting and Shooting the Cheapest Red Dot
Let’s start simple and mount the X-Vision dot to a simple .22LR AR pistol. Nothing too rough to see how the design zeroes and get a general feel for the dot. It mounts easily enough, and I set it up to zero. What I first noticed was how clear and crisp the dot it. It seems larger than 3 MOA, but it’s almost absolutely perfectly round and so very clear.
That’s the upside, but the downside is that it’s not super bright.
Even in daylight environments, the dot isn’t super bright. You can see it, but it’s not a big, bright, eye-catching dot. It works, but not exceptionally well.
The adjustment screws have two lock-down screws that have to be loosened before you can make adjustments. I started at 25 yards and fired a few rounds. I wasn’t even on paper so I got a bigger target and started over. It was way low and way to the right. Adjustments were listed as 3 cm per 100 meters. That broke my freedom unit soaked American mind, so I Googled it. 2.9 CM is approximately 1 MOA.
Getting it Zeroed
I just reduced the adjustments to 1 MOA mentally and did the measurements and math. With these adjustments in mind, I started zeroing or tried to. Slight adjustments would send rounds way high or way low. My windage adjustments were perfectly fine. After firing 21 rounds, I had impacts several inches high and several inches low.
With the gun rested, I looked through the lens as I made the elevation adjustments. To say the measurements are inaccurate would undersell it. There is no clicky feeling to the turrets. They just freely spin. It’s annoying, but this is the cheapest red dot, so I’m not expecting much. When observing the dot while making elevation adjustments, the dot sometimes does not move at all, and other times it jumps massively.
It took a bit longer than I wanted, but I finally got it very roughly zeroed and then tightened it down.
Shooting, Moving, and Grooving
With this thing finally zeroed, I do some general shooting with the .22LR. I ran some basic drills, had some fun, and the dot held zero fine. It’s not super bright, but it works well enough for punching paper. The dot does quickly change brightness levels as you transition between environments. Like a lot of cheaper auto-adjusting dots, it will not compensate for a weapon-mounted light and will be washed out quickly.
Just for fun, I tossed it on a twelve gauge Mossberg 930 SPX loaded with seven rounds of Sterling full-powered buckshot and let it rip. I then tossed the dot back on the .22 LR where I had it mounted before, and it seemingly held zero.
Next, the world’s cheapest red dot to a red gun from ASP dropped it over and over and over on both sides and the top. The dot still worked, and since it was covered in dirt, I gave it a wash. I sprayed it with a water hose and tested its IPX7 rating. Surprisingly the dot didn’t fail either test.
I remounted it to the .22LR and let the lead fly. There was a slight downward shift of about half an inch. That’s not bad by any means, especially for a 19-dollar optic. I did ensure it was mounted to the same spot every time, but remounting can also be a little difficult to get right.
The State of Red Dots
Red dots are in a pretty good place if this 19-dollar optic can take this much abuse and still work decently. Yep, it’s tough to zero, the adjustments suck, and it’s not super bright. I wouldn’t use it personally, but it might be a good option on a kid’s .22LR. Color me surprised, I didn’t have any hopes for the cheapest red dot I could find, and having zero expectations makes them easy to blow out of the water.
If you clicked this article angrily with a, “Who does this young punk Millennial think he is!?”, welcome!
First, I am almost certainly not talking about you and you will read why in a moment.
Secondly, my gray hairs thank you for calling me young. Neato.
So who am I talking about?
Read,
From a gun store social media group.
All gun stores have experienced this event, repeatedly. All ranges have seen a variant of this exchange multiples upon multiples of times. Most open social media forums that deal with firearm topics have very active knownothingitalls. And unfortunately many young men and women have had their early interactions in the firearms community with the proverbial “this guy” at the helm.
There is a millennial/zoomer equivalent too, but those lads and lasses have the excuse that they are young(er) and new(er) at this. The self professed expert in all things gun who is expertly experting above [/sarc], who just wants to flex their “knowledge” that isn’t, and hold onto a relevancy they never possessed, is going to vomit up whatever garbage they can put together that a naïve audience can absorb.
If challenged in any manner, including on fact that some of their advice is genuinely dangerous, they will become hostile and defensive. Best case these people will resort back to a “Well, that’s how we did it.” in a vague attempt to close the conversation with a ‘respect your elders’ card, when it assuredly is not how they did it because it doesn’t work, is physically impossible, or is a provable lie. There comes a point in time where it isn’t worth the sales counter’s time to disabuse the fool of foolish notions.
Buy your one box of 5.56 (because you can’t shoot .223, it’ll explode!) or 30.06 and depart please.
Stop ‘helping’ when nobody asked, you don’t know, and you’re wrong. Your ego will survive.
I’ve talked and trained with Vietnam vets who did the oft claimed Vietnam vet things, they don’t talk like the above imbecile. Clint Smith is a fantastic example. Sure, he thinks the AR-15 peaked at the M16A1 (and he isn’t lacking reasons to back that opinion either) but he’s also rolling around Thunder Ranch with a modern M4E1 TR with a dot and a light on it. Clint knows, and for all his character he teaches incredibly well because he knows and can set the goal, articulate the why, and work you through the how to get there.
I have never gotten a piece of blatantly, off the wall, assbackwards gun advice from Clint. I’ve disagreed on items and preferences, but never bad advice.
I have heard form or been ‘corrected’ by plenty of people who just assumed the thing they heard, from the unverified whomever, is the absolute truth. Often without context or
In addition to genuine SME’s, like Clint, any elder who firmly know what they know and know what they don’t know is worth listening to on what they know. Plenty of guys out there who could school me up on reloads for .38/.357 and their excellent method of putting them together, but who wouldn’t try and profess to me how to put together a modernized lever gun.
A whole mess of folks who could give me tips on cleaning a deer and their favorite recipes who wouldn’t and won’t talk to me about the ballistics and terminal effects of the .308 round they use, they just know it works and they leave it at that.
But then other people don’t leave it be, and you get another wondrous story like the above.
Or one like mine where a man who was on “the teams” until 1984 (never actually said SEAL, just “the teams”) and referenced the UDT class of 1946 (UDT started in ’42 and SEAL program started in ’62 but he looked to be born in ’60 roughly) additionally stated he had ran tens of thousands of rounds through his P226 in the years prior to the pistol’s development. In a touching addition to his tall tale of being on a team he was two decades too young for and shooting a yet to be invented pistol, he added that his daughter later bought him his old P226, because Naval Special Operations just gets rid of old 226’s, used before their invention, at the local gun shows.
These people are out there “helping” new gun owners.
We need to cease their ravings by politely but firmly intervening when we can.
So the next time you get, “Okay Boomer”‘d, before getting angry, consider where the advice you just gave came from. Was the source a sketchy dude who just claimed some special forces status from back in the day? Do we remember that guys who were middle to senior military for the launch of GWOT are in their 50’s now so that 50-60 “Vietnam” or even other more plausible location ‘operator’ vet is full of shit?
I genuinely don’t know what combination of ‘I can help’, service shame, and ego combine to create these people but it’s like claiming to have the largest most awesome store of Pokémon cards and having one pack of old ones beaten to hell and back, or claiming to be a wizard on car engines when you’ve at best pulled a spark plug from a chainsaw.
Conclusion
Don’t just trust the old gun guy, get a second opinion from a professional source. Even if that’s just an FAQ page.
It’s an interesting insight into the perspectives of who I’ll title our ‘unaligned’ voices. People who are not actively hostile towards the 2nd Amendment, they just have a hard time mustering the energy to care. Their priorities are on different items.
That’s fine, but it is telling to see the perspective spoken aloud.
Over the course of nearly three decades, Congress followed a familiar pattern on guns. Send “thoughts and prayers” in reaction to the latest horrific mass shooting, take failed votes on a laundry list of gun safety bills, and get nothing done.
Which was the direct result of getting the wrong things done under the Clinton AWB, which didn’t prevent either of the most memorable school massacres in history. Columbine under the ban, and Virginia Tech just after the ban’s expiration, which was committed with weapons that were perfectly legal during the ban, conventional handguns.
So nothing done was a good thing, we’d already gone down some fundamentally stupid legal avenues to “fix” violent criminality… oh, I’m sorry, gun violence.
Until now.
Yep, time, atrophy, and circumstances meant it was politically damaging to maintain the thoughts and prayers mantra, so they tried the other version of thoughts and prayers with, “if it saves just one life, it is worth it.”
It’s the same thing, just one comes with legal penalties that don’t penalize the dangerous.
I am a long-time Republican pollster who has polled for elected GOP members who rarely support new gun laws. So, what went right this time so that lawmakers could finally come together and pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act?
They gutted it down to a swallowable amount of nothing burger, with a huge pile of money for school security.
The answer is simple: Democrats agreed not to make the perfect the enemy of the good, and Republicans heard from their own voters who wanted to see action.
By making it a swallowable enough nothing burger, mostly annoying with a few provisions that probably need legal challenges, and a giant pile of money for school security.
This may sound “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” corny coming from a pollster, but the fundamental role of a Member of the House or Senate is to represent the interests of the constituents who send them to D.C. And the truth is that Americans of all political stripes see an urgent need for gun safety reforms.
They just differ wildly on what those should be and on their various competencies to provide any constructive commentary on those reforms. Not all opinions are created equal. You’re allowed to have them, certainly, but how seriously we take them should be directly causative with how well it is backed as a well formed opinion via cross examination and critical thinking.
Politicos on both sides don’t like that, dumb rubes are easier.
In a recent survey my polling firm GS Strategy Group conducted in partnership with the centrist think tank Third Way, an overwhelming majority of voters in key red states said they thought it was too easy to get a gun in America. Too easy in Texas. Too easy in South Carolina. And yes, too easy in Florida.
How did they phrase this question?
What is the average understanding of the current acquisition process for firearms of any of those surveyed?
Did any of those surveyed qualify as a competent resource on the current firearm acquisition process? What was their answer, since it should be weighted.
We need to stop valuing opinion for the sake of opinion.
Our survey also revealed that voters — including Republicans and gun-owners — support common-sense gun safety measures.
What do they consider ‘common sense’?
How many of them can articulate a policy and method of implementing it that begins to cover down on the projected effects, both positive and negative?
A whopping 90 percent of voters in Florida support expanding background checks;
Can they articulate the current background check process?
Can they articulate what the ‘expansion’ will cover. Experts in this field have already stated in multiple forums that the current background check system is overly broad and generates an absurd number of false positives.
These aren’t false positives on a test to see if you have the Flu or COVID, these are false positives that can put you in dire legal jeopardy or at hostile odds with law enforcement.
79 percent of voters in South Carolina support red flag laws;
Ah yes, due process clause is just a guideline really.
Did any of those surveyed theorize what to do if they were red flagged?
What kind of reputation damage, legal troubles, real world unrecoupable costs, and potential for the state to damage or lose your property during the interim do they believe this will cause?
Did we see a cost projection analysis?
80 percent of voters in Texas support raising the purchase age for semi-automatic weapons to 21, and 81 percent of voters in Utah support closing the boyfriend loophole.
The boyfriend loophole is its own can of worms on what constitutes misdemeanor domestic violence in the small percentage of situations in which there was no cohabitation involved in the relationship.
When you break the policy down, it may have needed to be addressed, especially in the modern age, but it is incredibly niche misdemeanor criminality.
These are not extreme policies.
Not until you become their legal target and you shouldn’t have.
They are mainstream ideas, and lawmakers shouldn’t shy away from them for fear of electoral backlash.
No, but they should be critically examined for their cost/benefit and not merely sold to us on garbage grade buzzwards like “common sense measures”. If I ask why the red flag law makes sense, I shouldn’t be treated to a buffet of “if it saves just one life” and “popular, common sense” platitudes. I should be given a quick, logical synopsis on why this will have a positive influence that outweighs its negative effects and the mitigations to be implemented for those negative effects.
In fact, our survey showed that voters in Florida would be 51 percent more likely to support Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and in Texas 58 percent more likely to support Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) if they voted in favor of the policies included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
Which again, was the safest nothing burger they could pass to do something while doing as close to allowable to nothing.
While the will of the people is essential, it is rarely enough to seal the deal. The other key component to lawmaking — arguably the most crucial, given our political climate — is compromise. With such a thin majority likely to persist no matter which party holds power, being willing to negotiate, bend, and accept half a loaf (or even a single slice) is imperative.
Yes, the Red vs Blue game in Washington is tedious and tiring, but I feel so much could be alleviated if the young crop of lawmakers would start coming at these policy proposals with both the attitude that a moron’s opinion doesn’t matter much and that they have to show their work on why this needs to be a law.
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is the product of hard-fought compromise.
And making it safe enough to politically survive for both parties.
This long overdue progress is the result of lawmakers putting aside differences, focusing on common ground, and accomplishing what the American people sent them to Congress to do.
LOL.
I suppose it is in a technical sense, but the fact remains that the Democrats want to push valueless feel good policies and the Republicans value the voting power of the unwashed masses more than implementing critically thought through policy. Democrats do too, don’t get me wrong, but they’re the ones with the crazier and more asinine ideas on this topic.
There are certainly some lawmakers who may have wanted more,
Yep, bans are still being pushed to spite the Bruen decision.
and those who wanted less,
Anyone with at least a journeyman level understanding in this topic
but their willingness to meet in the middle to get something done is vital to our success as a country.
Agreed. But this wasn’t that.
Our great nation was built on compromise, and we will continue to thrive because of it, not in spite of it.
All nations, all societies, all groups of people are built on compromise. Contracts are agreements and compromises. Compromise on its own is not a good thing, compromises that build better policy for the citizens of this nation that protect their rights and agreements are.
This historic legislation will save lives.
Unlikely to be in any way a calculable metric, so this statement means nothing.
And it will do so without infringing on the ability of law-abiding gun owners to exercise their Second Amendment rights legally and freely.
It absolutely will, especially for those in the lower income 18-20 year old range.
It is an all too rare outcome in Washington D.C. — a win-win.
It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The only unequivocal win out of the BSCA is the school security and mental resource funding, and its value will be directly tied to how well that funding is spent at the school level.
So, let’s build on this moment to make compromises of this nature the norm, not the exception.
Why? Sure we passed a law, the best part of which could have been passed without touching firearm policy at all, but it was demanded by the loud and lowest information members of the congress that we “do something” about guns. So we did as close to nothing as politically possible for both parties.
It’s time to take this model and ask: what’s next?
Hopefully a series of landslide victories for the 2nd Amendment using Bruen as the backbone.
America was founded in a post-firearm world. We were a nation tamed and settled by firearms, making us a bit unique in that way. The tradition of settling issues via dueling in the United States went back to 1777 and stuck around until 1859 before the United States, through a degree of public opinion and legislation, turned against the art of dueling. The final notable duel in the United States was Broderick vs. Terry.
Today we are going to discuss the last American duel, talk about the men who participated in the duel, their firearms, and the duel itself.
Broderick vs. Terry – The Men
Broderick
David C. Broderick was born in 1820 in Washington D.C. He grew up as the son of an immigrant couple, and his father worked as a stonecutter. His parents were Irish and came to the United States to help construct the United States Capitol. By 1823 he had moved to New York City with his parents and attended school while also apprenticing as a stonecutter.
He became active in politics as a young man, and by the age of 26, he ran to be a Representative for New York but lost by a narrow margin. A few years later, he went to California as part of the 1849 Gold Rush. Once in California, he entered politics once more, serving in various roles in the midst of state politics.
He eventually controlled San Francisco to the point where his biographer described him as a mini dictator. He sold positions like the Sheriff, Tax Collector, and District Attorney, which gathered their salaries through fees. The salaries added up to $50,000 a year for these positions, and Broderick got half of that. In 1856 he was elected as a Senator for California.
Terry
David Terry was born in Kentucky in 1823 and had a bit of a rip-roaring life. Terry moved to Texas with his family and, as an adult, became a Texas Ranger. He fought in the Mexican-American War, and after his time as a Ranger studied law and became a lawyer.
Like Broderick he rushed to California to make his fortune, not as a miner but as a lawyer. He was ardently pro-slavery and opposed California’s new constitution, which prohibited the practice. Terry was a delegate to the constitutional convention, but his efforts were ultimately in vain.
He became known for his violent temper. He once assaulted an editor who printed something that offended him. Terry even stabbed a litigant in court and, in general, was a man people crossed the street to avoid.
What Led to the Broderick Vs. Terry Duel
Your fiercest enemies were often once your friends, and this is true when it comes to the Broderick vs. Terry debacle. Both were prominent Democrats in California. They were once good friends and political allies. David S. Terry was on the Supreme Court of California, and David C. Broderick served as a United States Senator.
At one point, Broderick described Terry as “the only honest man on the Supreme bench.” The men may have been friends, but they had disagreements. Terry was pro-slavery, and Broderick was an abolitionist. Terry eventually lost his seat on the Supreme Court, and Terry blamed this on Broderick and his ally’s anti-slavery campaigns and positions.
He would blame and insult Broderick, and those comments found their way to Broderick, who would state:
“I see that Terry has been abusing me, I now take back the remark I once made that he is the only honest judge in the Supreme Court. I was his friend when he was in need of friends, for which I am sorry. Had the vigilance committee disposed of him as they did of others, they would have done a righteous act.”
When Terry again campaigned for the Supreme Court, Broderick purposefully acted against the effort. This led the men to trade insults, and shortly after Broderick lost an election campaign, Terry sent a letter to him, which opened the challenge to a duel. After some hemming and hawing, the men agreed to a duel.
The Duel
The Broderick vs. Terry Duel occurred on September 13th, 1859. The men attempted to duel on the 12th, but the local police force broke the duel up and sent the men home. They moved to a secluded location outside of San Francisco, near Lake Merced.
According to an issue of Munsey’s magazine from 1905, the duel was almost set up to ensure Terry would win. The men used a pair of .58 caliber Belgian flintlock pistols. Both weapons reportedly had hair triggers, but Broderick’s was so ‘delicately set’ that it could fire when ‘jarred.’
Courtesy PBS
Additionally, according to the National Park Service, Broderick was unfamiliar with this type of firearm. Terry, on the flip side, had practiced with the gun for several days prior to the duel. Terry also had the benefit of military experience.
At the final 1,2,3, the men turned to fire. Broderick’s pistol fired as he raised it, and the round landed six feet in front of Terry. Terry then took careful aim and shot Broderick in the chest. Broderick was rushed to Doctor Leonidas Haskell’s home, where he died three days later.
Some of his final words being, “They killed me because I am opposed to the extension of slavery and a corrupt administration.”
The Aftermath
The Broderick vs. Terry duel drew national attention, and Broderick became a hero of the anti-slavery movement. Terry was accused of being an assassin. Division within the United States grew.
A warrant for Terry’s arrest was issued, and when police attempted to arrest him, they were met by Terry, the Sheriff, and two other men wielding shotguns. They agreed to turn themselves in three days in Oakland, claiming they feared reprisal if they were arrested in Oakland. Terry turned himself in, and his case was dismissed in Marin and later San Mateo county.
Terry would be killed by a US Marshal in 1889 when he attacked a United States Supreme Court Justice. His temper had clearly not been tamed in his later years.
After the Broderick vs. Terry duel, several states moved to ban the act of dueling, and the public opinion of the act soured, making it much less acceptable to settle disputes with firearms. The site of the duel is now a registered historical landmark and wears a marker where each man stood when they fired their shots.
You may have noted recently that in addition to their usual pants-wetting nonsense, that Leftists now hate (or are afraid of) the Catholic Rosary. It’s now “Right Wing Extremism” or some such twaddle. (Link goes to a related article so we don’t give those idiots at the Atlantic any clicks.)
Being personally a survivor of 12 years of Catholic education and now a somewhat lapsed practitioner (if not a downright agnostic at times), I should be the last person to be a Defender of the Faith. Nonetheless if it sticks in a finger in the eye of Anti-gun Lefties then I am all for any practice which does so. And if it advances one’s spiritual journey in the process then mores-the-better.
So it is in this spirit that I feel it necessary to provide today’s fun fact:
Saint Gabriel Possenti’s feast day is February 27. He is the (unofficial but proposed) patron of handguns because his marksmanship enabled him to rescue a woman about to be raped by a marauding gang of thugs at Isola del Gran Sasso, Italy in 1860.
After freeing a young woman from would-be rapists, St. Gabriel Possenti confronted the onrushing brigands waving revolvers. At that moment grabbing a revolver from one of the brigands, Possenti fired at a lizard that happened to be running across the road and dispatched it with one shot. Thus having demonstrated his excellent handgun marksmanship, he was able to take command of the situation and ran the now-frightened brigands out of town.
St. Gabriel Possenti performed this feat of courage without causing physical harm to a single human being.
If you are somehow put-off by a religious website as reference, here is the link to the Wikipedia entry.
This dead-eyed young man who defended the innocent with a handgun was canonized by the Church in 1920. That was over 100 years ago, lest some easily offended Lefty think this was some new act of nefariousness by feared religious extremists.
Although St Gabriel’s designation as Patron of Marksmen and Handgunners is unofficial, there is a society which is campaigning for such official recognition. Frankly, if there is an official patron saint of Artillery (Saint Barbara), and Armorers/Gunsmiths (Saint Dunstan), and Hunters (Saint Hubert of Liege) then why not Handgunners too?
Side note: If you’ve never heard of Saint Hubert then you’ve never paid attention to the logo on a bottle of Jaegermeister.
The story of Saint Gabriel and the lizard is almost certainly apocryphal, but what saint’s story isn’t embellished and somewhat the product of faithful fervor? Does anybody actually believe that George Washington chopped down his father’s cherry tree?
Urban Legend or Article of Faith, it hardly matters to me. Saint Gabriel Possenti is now on my list of “friends in high places”.
The well recognized clothing, outdoor, and tactical gear retailer is opening their 100th location. 5.11 has been making great strides in diversifying their product line to include more casual and everyday wear in recent years, starting to break them out of their mold as the slightly too tactical to be casual clothing provider while also trying to offer range and duty ready items like their Maverick belt and TacTec plate carrier system.
Their footwear, in my opinion, and their women’s apparel have been their explosive successes.
Irvine, Calif. (Aug. 23, 2022) –5.11 Tactical®, the global innovator of purpose-built apparel, footwear and gear, will celebrate the grand opening of its 100th company-owned retail store in Oxnard, California on Saturday, September 17. The store marks a major milestone in the brand’s retail expansion and growth since it introduced its first company-owned retail location in 2014.
“Strategic and aggressive retail expansion has been one of our top priorities in recent years and getting to 100 locations has been a major milestone for us,” said 5.11’s CEO Francisco J. Morales. “A larger retail presence allows us to offer the full 5.11 experience to existing customers while creating opportunities to introduce new customers to our outstanding products. We’re thrilled to reach 100 stores and excited to continue our growth into the future.”
Well-known for its technical apparel, footwear and gear that’s popular with public safety professionals and military personnel, 5.11’s full product offering provides items designed to keep outdoor adventurers, fitness fanatics and tactical enthusiasts equipped and ready for anything. The brand’s purpose-built product lines vary from workout equipment and apparel to everyday clothing options and much more.
“5.11’s approach to serving our consumers is to provide our consumers with optionality. From our robust e-commerce business, to the way our brand comes to life in our retail locations, as well as our many wholesale partners,” said 5.11’s Senior Vice President of Omni-Channel, Mark Parker. “Our focus has always been to serve our first responders, while welcoming new consumers to our brand, and 100 retail stores shows our commitment to achieve this across the U.S.”
Currently, 5.11 owns retail locations in 31 states with larger metropolitan areas serving as a hub for several convenient locations that offers customer easy access and additional shopping opportunities nearby. 5.11 Oxnard joins the ranks as 5.11’s 20th store in California.
“Whether it’s for everyday use, outdoor adventures, on-duty use by public safety professionals, or fitness training, we offer gear that is made to help users perform their best in all aspects of life, said 5.11’s CMO, Debra Radcliff. “At our retail locations, customers are able to find the right items for their needs and interact with our knowledgeable staff to find exactly what they are looking for.”
5.11’s retail locations provide an ideal opportunity for tactical professionals and outdoor enthusiasts to engage with the 5.11 brand and its knowledgeable staff. The stores feature a complete product offering tailored specifically to each region, including head-to-toe apparel and gear for men and women.
With its roots in servicing the law enforcement, first responder and military communities, 5.11 prides itself on hiring former servicemen and women and veterans from the local area, whenever possible.
With offices around the globe, 5.11 works directly with end users to create purpose-built apparel, footwear and gear designed specifically to enhance the safety, accuracy, speed, and performance of tactical professionals and technical enthusiasts worldwide. 5.11 products exceed rigorous standards, which have allowed the brand to establish a reputation for innovation and authenticity, and become the premier choice for those who always have to be ready. 5.11 products can be purchased online, through authorized dealers and retailers, as well as at 5.11 company-owned retail stores.
Learn more about 5.11’s best-selling gear and accessories at www.511tactical.com. Find a full list of 5.11 company-owned retail stores at https://www.511tactical.com/locations/. Connect with 5.11 on Facebook, Twitter @511Tactical and on Instagram @511Tactical and #511tactical
5.11, Inc. is a subsidiary of Compass Diversified (NYSE: CODI).
5.11, 5.11 Tactical and Always Be Ready are registered trademarks of 5.11, Inc. All rights reserved.
